































































































































































































Chap. 


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.!^ m 


















-‘v ■ 





^<3:^ ' 

, . '.''Si-.: 

* u; 

^ OVT' '*» 

__. • ?“ Vi ♦ 


■<r, 



• , ^ A? 




v'« 







*» < 


^.*V* -Jpl ‘ ‘. ^ 
^ ■ 






•, 


I ■ 


, 1 H 




*1 


4 







If^l^/’ c 


• • 


'I . ’* 





; '.Ws 



:..K -V'.-'■vV-. •'•'^•■iL 


•M , 7 ' • • 



, « 




<» 




i« 


-VWjte 


*r- 




'• • 


f_ 


' • • 


t ^ 


i’ *^***> / 

• ir ' * : " ^ 

■ r v! ' . !jy» <* 

• 1 I V 

.* ' • • \t . *./ J. 






■H- 


1 ■' 


• ;'?. .. 'll 



-.1 ^ ’ 

'. r^ ^ , • '-- 


■ > 


•■ ». 


. ■ /'h7V 

■ *r • - I r • 




k >1 


■■>■ -, 










V'. m 

*■ "a; 

Ji » 



1 

t 




»* 

• /« 

V'Z 

:i- 


-.Sl. 



* i jf 


' ■ ' ‘ I. 

i; ' 


^ ■ i 


. ^^)»^ A- • 


» • 


t-\ Ij' 







*t 






■ J V 


■f * 


. * 


'i t 



r ■ 1 Y i v*'' 

«»v y ‘ ' 

|vW , .1 ' ,', , ,( 5^1 




. 1 


I'wBl 7. ■'^ 


i’ ’ ^ ' % '. ' ^ 




I'. 




IL> 


^ • r JT . 

' ‘ ♦T>#f 


0 * - 


I - vV ♦/ \ 

‘ ’ 4 *-' L ’ 

. ■,*• *1 I." I 

I •* r'l; -J ■ 


4 I > 

• ^ 4 ^ 


H-‘ . ,/•■'. *1 ; ■ , iA^Jjt.i / , - ‘ : 

i< ■ *-' < 1 ^ j" rfSij- r\i - • - *' - 




tf , r. 




PM 


•• * t . . 


.* • kV • 

Vu .r. 






- V S - ' ■ ' • 


' 


KaXI » . .‘^ ViMii..- .*^ ■ *mr^ »' 

' 4 < •. ^UB i ■ iJB *A 4Bi . i '7-j * 






» A ^ 



Introduction to Sociology. 


BY 

AETHUE FAIEBANKS. 


SECOND EDITION, REVISED. 


NEW YOEK: 

CHAELES SCEIBNEE’S SONS. 
1899 . 

S 



51167 



i/' 


PEEFACE 


In the present state of the science of sociology it is 
rash to venture beyond the monograph on some special 
topic, to discuss the subject as a whole. Tlie present 
volume is not intended as a systematic reconstruction 
of the principles of sociology, even in outline. Its aim 
is rather practical. Several classes of students to-day 
are directing more and more attention to the science of 
society, with the purpose of finding a more scientific basis 
for their work. The minister would infuse religion into 
the social relations of every-day life, and seeks to under¬ 
stand society, which he would make Christian. Touched 
with a deep sense of human woe^ “ethical” reformers find 
that material aid and education, and even friendship, 
cannot meet the wants of the individual, but that they 
must learn to know society, and work through society, in 
order to help the man. The effort to administer charity 
wisely; the effort to make criminals into men, and to 
prevent men from becoming criminals; the effort to 
develop a sounder municipal life in our cities, and a 
truer political sentiment in our nations—these are but 
some of the lines of work in which men to-day are 
driven to study the science of society, in order that 
they may not do harm where they would do good. 
Moreover, students of politics^ of economics, of psychology 
and philosophy, of history, are turning more and mgre 


Vlll 


PREFACE. 


attention to the sociological basis of their work. It has 
been my aim to furnish a brief introduction to the 
subject, which would make plain to the reader something 
of its scope and importance, and, it may be, aid him 
in farther study. That the specialist in sociological in¬ 
vestigation will find much here to advance the knowledge 
of the science, is not my expectation. 

It has seemed to me unwise to burden the page with 
many foot-notes. To take the place of these, both in 
directing the reader to farther material and in making 
general acknowledgement to scholars to whose works 
I have been indebted, I have added at the end of the 
book a bibliography, arranged in detail according to the 
chapters in the body of the work. I have received 
many suggestions in particular from Professor Giddings’ 
papers; and regret that his Principles of Sociology only 
came into my hands when the present work w^as already 
in type. Finally, I desire to express my obligation to 
three friends and former colleagues—Professors Colby, 
J. K. Lord, and Wells, of Dartmouth College—for their 
help and encouragement. 


Yale University, 

April 22nd, 1896. 


AETHUR FAIRBANKS. 


TABLE OF CONTENTS 


INTRODUCTION. 

PAGE 

1 . What is a Society ? And why should Social Phenomena 

BE Studied ? . . . . . . 12 

II. Relation of Sociology to the other Social Sciences . 19 

III. The Proper Sphere of Sociology as a Science . .117 

CHAPTER 1 . 

THE ORGANIC CHARACTER OF A SOCIETY. 

Is Society an organism ? Biological Sociology. Meaning of “ or¬ 
ganic,” as applied to Society, 

A. General character of the social unit. I. Complexity and 
unity of a society. 2. The unity of a society is dynamic, rather 
than static. Dynamic interdependence of the parts of a society. 

3. The unity of a society is determined from within. Its growth 
is governed by an internal law. 

B, A society and its environment, i. Physical and social 
environment of a society. 2. Each organism has its place in 
organic evolution, each society in social evolution. 

The danger and the value of the biological analogy. (Note on 
the differences between a society and a biological organism) . 31 


CHAPTER II. 

THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF SOCIETY. 

The physical basis of life. The physical basis of society. Physical 
factors—race and locality. 

A. Locality: Its general effect. Classification of external 
influences, i. Effect of the contour of the earth’s surface. 
Contour determines {a) the size of the social group, (&) the 
isolation of social groups, (c) the lines of social movement. 
2. Influence of climate—light, temperature, moisture. 3. Society 
is modified by what it uses— {a) inorganic materials, (&) effect of 
fauna, (c) effect of vegetation. 


X TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

PACK 

B. Race : Race expansion, the theory of population. Present 
increase of population in Europe. Increase in uncivilised coun¬ 
tries. What is a race ? The race and blood-relationship. The 
unity of the race. Race-persistence in different environments 45 

CHAPTER III. 

ASSOCIATION: THE RELAIION OF MEN IN SOCIETY. 

The social group not merely physical, i. Bonds of feeling: Man 
not a social animal by nature. Influences for and against soci¬ 
ability. Natural selection favours the gregarious instinct in 
man. Sentiment as a social bond. 2. Bonds of common function. 

The unity of a biological organ is a unity of function. The 
unity of the social group a unity of function. Social evolution 
involves diflerentiation of activities and of groups. In this 
process the bonds uniting men become more definite, various, 
permanent. Solidarity of the family increased in the new forms 
of social activity. Increase in extent of ex})ansive social groups. 

I. Attractive forces based in feeling. These forces part of the 
psychical character of individuals. 2. Functional bonds due to 
. common activity. These bonds also part of the psychical 
character of the individual. 

Meaning of “association.” Conditions favouring association. 
Influence of locality, of race, on association. Social and psychical 
factors favouring association (vocation, rank, &c.) . . . 61 

CHAPTER IV. 

THE SOCIAL MIND. 

The solidarity of a society or social group. The psychical life of 
the social group, i. Language and thought common to the 
members of a social group. Beliefs, practical knowledge, methods 
of investigation and of proof, common to the social group. 

2. Habits and virtues peculiar to each social group. Judgment 
of action by conscience a social fact. Ends of action and ideals 
common to the group. 3. Types of feeling mark the social 
group. 4 . Self-consciousness of the social group, of the voli¬ 
tional group. 

The unity of the social mind and of the individual mind. 

“ Social mind ” a concrete phrase. Relation of the social mind 
and individual minds. The social mind exists in and through 
the individual minds composing it. The social mind the product 
of association. 

(Note on the science of society and the sciences of man. 
Sociology and history, especially the history of civilisation. 
Sociology and the genesis of psychical processes. Attention, 
comparison, generalisation, &c., from the standpoint of sociology. 
Sociology and logic and ethics). , . , . 76 


TABLE OF CONTENTS, 


XI 


CHAPTER V. 

CAUSES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY, 

PAGE 

Social groups depend on social activities. Social force versus stimuli 
to social activity. Needs of the individual stimulate social 
activities. Classification of social stimuli. 

A. Essential stimuli, i. Need of food as a stimulus to social 
activity. Need of protection against cold and wet. Fire as a 
socialiser. Nee'd of food and clothing as economic stimuli. 
Fundamental character of these needs. Their wide range. 2. 

Need of protection against fellow-men as a social stimulus. 

This need varies with the position of the individual or tribe. 

The early state, as meeting this need. Need of protection in 
developed civilisation. Increasing need of protection within the 
state. 3. Emotions as causes of social activity: (a) Self-regarding 
emotions in primitive society, in developed society ; (6) General 
sympathetic emotions; (c) Sympathetic emotions directed toward 
particular individuals. Broad reach of emotions at the basis of 
family life. 

B. Non-essential or derived social stimuli, i. The love of the 
beautiful leads to social activity—affects the ordinary needs of 
man. 2. Intellectual needs lead to social activity; so do moral 

and religious needs. Conclusion. - . , , 92 

• 


CHAPTER VI. 

MODES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 

Variety of social phenomena. Genetic principle of classification. 

Its meaning, its value, and its application. 

I. Economic mode of social activity. Rise of economic activity. 

The three phases: [a) circulation, {h) consumption, (c) produc¬ 
tion. Rise of groups and institutions in economic activity. 
Relation of economic activity to other forms of social life. 

H. “ Social ” activity of society. Character of “social ” groups. 
Custom the fundamental type of all social authority. Relation 
of “ social ” activity to other forms of social life. 

HI. Political activity of society. Political life and other 
forms of social activity. 

IV. Psychical activity of society, i. Aesthetic. 2. Intellectual 
activity and institutions. Truth and beauty as social principles. 

3. Moral activity and institutions. 4. Religious activity and 
institutions. Relation of psychical activity to other forms of 
social activity. Conclusion . . . . . 108 


TABLE OF CONTENTS, 


xii 


CHAPTER VII. 

THE INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION OF SOCIETY, 

PAGE 

Production the most important of the three factors in determining 
industrial organisation. Early industrial life. The stone age; the 
bronze and iron ages. Social importance of the development of 
tools. Early differentiation of industrial functions. Source of 
food as marking stages in development. The hunting stage, the 
nomad stage, and the agricultural stage. Influence of each on 
social life. Increase in the differentiation of labour. 

A. Exchange and the gradual development of the market. 

I. Institution of money. 2. Institutions of‘transportation. 

War, and the development of circulation. Effect of circulation 
on other modes of social activity. 

B. Consumption. The “ economic man.” Man’s needs change 
in content, in imperativeness, and in variety. Physical needs 
determine economic life. The institution of property. Social 
importance of property. 

C. Production. Relation to circulation, to consumption. The 
institutions of production. Slavery, feudalism, the household 
unit, the factory .system. Influence of industrial organisation 
on other modes of social activity. 

The ideal of the economic group. Influence of this ideal on 
social life. Fundamental character of the economic mode of 
social activity ^ . . . - . * 122 


CHAPTER VIII. 

THE FAMILY AS A SOCIAL UNIT. 

The family and the state. Earlier theory of the rise of the state 
from the family. The family in the matriarchal stage. Results 
accepted by recent writers: {a) The principles of marriage 
unions ; (b) Polyandry, polygyny, and monogamy; (c) Blood- 
affiliation and property rights in the formation of the family. 

I. The early family in the economic activity of society. Later 
forms of the family in the economic world. The economic future 
of the family. 2. The family and the “social” activity of 
society. 3. The family and the psychical activity of society: 

(a) liitellectual, (b) sesthetic, (c) moral—moral life of parents, 
moral personality of child, developed in the family — moral 
inheritance includes customs and social usages—moral training 
in the family and in general society — moral inheritance the 
basis of real progress ; (d) the religious unity of the family. 
Continuity and progress of religion depend on the family. 4. 

The function of the family in political life , . .141 


TABLE OF CONTENTS. 


Xlll 


CHAPTER IX. 

THE STATE AS AN ORGAN OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 

PAGE 

Methods used in the science of politics. («) The beginnings of 
political life ; (&) the tribe state ; (c) the city state of the Greeks 
and Romans ; (d) the feudal state ; (e) the limited monarchy 
and democracy. 

Relation of law to the state. Early law based on custom and 
religion. Law as extended by the courts in later times. Law¬ 
making by legislatures. Sovereignty and the conception of the 
state. 

The functions of the modern state. Three forms of state 
activity: i. Diplomatic and military activity. 2. The state 
punishes crime, and defends the citizen in his rights. The 
prevention of crime. 3. The state protects the citizen in the 
exercise of civil rights. 

The state in relation to other modes of social activity : i. The 
state and economic activity; direct interference with industry 
by the state. 2. The state and the family. 3. The state and 
higher social activities: {a) education; {h) the state and moral 
life; (c) the state and the church. Conclusion , , .157 


CHAPTER X. 

THE INDIVIDUAL FROM THE STANDPOINT 
OF SOCIOLOGY. 

Welfare of the individual vs. the welfare of the social group. This 
conflict in the different spheres of social life. The teaching of 
history as to this antithesis. The group as a social unit. The 
place of the individual in society. The antithesis betAveen the 
individual and the group is false. Psychical power involves 
dependence on society. Institntions as a source of power. 
Education proceeds on this principle. Egoism and altruism. 

The person is the concrete expres.sion of the group-life. 

The element of individuality in persons. Individuality of 
persons and complexity of society. Individuality of environ¬ 
ment. The individual personality. The individual and social 
progress , . , . . . . 174 


CHAPTER XI. 

EXTERNAL ACCOUNT OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 

Introduction to the second part;—social development. 

A. Continuity of social life. Continuity from the physical 
standpoint. Continuity of social life. Of institutions. The 


r TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

PAGE 

generation of psychical life. Continuity and change. Social 
development from the standpoint of a supposed goal. 

B. Increasing unity and complexity of social life. Mr. Spencer’s 
law of progress. Physical side of social development. General 
character of the early social gi’oup. Fundamental forms of 
social activity become distinct. The simple economic group. 
Beginning of separate economic functions and classes. Results 
of the more complex economic activity. Continuation of this 
process at the present time. Political activity becomes broader 
and more complex. Increasing complexity and unity in other 
lines. Conclusion . . o . . : 189 


CHAPTER XII. 

PROCESSES OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 

Two theories of social development. The two processes exist side 
by side. 

A. Process of dispersion and differentiation, i. Race-increase. 
Historical evidence for centres of dispersion. Differentiation of 
physical types. Conclusion. 2. Differentiation and dispersion 
of forms of psychical life. The example of language. The 
example of religion. Statement of the first process. 

B. Process of agglomeration and assimilation. Civilisation 

lessens the number of social groups. Character of the second 
process, i. Physical side of the process. Persistence of race 
characteristics. Unification of culture. 2. Psychical side of the 
process, (a) Example of language. Tendencies to persistence 
and to assimilation, {h) Example of religion. Fusion of religious 
forms. Development stimulated by the contact of different 
religious types. Conclusion , . . 203 


CHAPTER XIII. 

NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 

Discussion as to the real nature of progress. 

A. The biological theory of natural selection, (a) Multiplica¬ 
tion. (&) Heredity and variability, (c) Conflict. Re.sult: The 
survival of the fittest. Modifications of the biological struggle. 

B. Modification of the struggle for existence in the case of 
man. i. The unity of the social group as a modifying factor. 
Examples. 2. Lines limiting struggle no longer territorial, but 
by classes. 3. Reason as a modifying factor. Resulting changes. 

C. Conditions of struggle and selection are present in human 
society. Multiplication, heredity, and variability follow biolo¬ 
gical law. Multiplication, joined with social ambition, must 


TABLE OF CONTENTS. 


XV 


PAGE 

produce struggle. Conditions of struggle in the different modes 
of social activity. Farther discussion of heredity and variation 
as basis of selection. Psychical heredity. Multiplication of 
social groups leads to a struggle of groups, in addition to struggle 
of individuals within each group. Multiplication of ideas and 
psychical struggle. Resume : Conditions present in society that 
inevitably lead to struggle and selection . . - » 221 


CHAPTER XIV. 

NATURAL SELECTION {Concluded). 

Discussion as to the real nature of progress— continued. 

D. Struggle for existence in human society, i. Economic 
activity as a struggle for existence. Progress not from struggle, 
but to higher forms of struggle. 2. “Social” activity as a 
.struggle for existence. 3. Political activity as struggle. Import¬ 
ance of the struggle between lesser political units. 4 . Psychical 
life involves struggles, as to new ideas and inventions, new 
aesthetic and ethical and religious ideals. 

Changes in the form of struggle as society develops, i. 
Physical struggle is gradually raised to the psychical plane. 

2. The aim comes to be not destruction, but supremacy. 

3. Irrational and rational forms of struggle. Change in the 
competing units as the struggle becomes psychical. 

E. Survival of the fittest as the outcome of struggle, i. Sur¬ 
vival of the fittest individuals, (a) Biologically, the less fit perish, 
the fittest survive, and increa.se most rapidly, and rise in social 
position. (&) Economic survival; social apparatus for determining 
it. (c) Political survival; social apparatus for determining it. 

(d) Psychical survival; social apparatus for determining it. 

2. Survival of the fittest groups. Fitness of groups determined 
by their organisation. Type of family, industrial organisation, 
political princi}des, standard of right, of truth, of beauty: as 
elements of the organisation that determines the fitness of the 
group. Authority of each is made clear by the survival of the 
group which it helps to make fit. 3. The survival of the 
fittest institutions. Process of survival of social institutions. 
Authority and stability of institutions, together with principle 

of development. Progress by the survival of the fittest . . 239 


Bibliogeaphy 


. 265 


1 


I • 



i ■" 


^ ’ 



I • 



. ti4> 


» I 

I > 


t « 


1 > 




*.ir* 

*4'^ *'" r 


. y 

41 • ’ 



4 * 


p 


-i-> 

.i V 


.* 




*, > 

• • * 


r»» 

t i 


t • 



*vv 

'-'f 


’} 


•* 







V' ' 



4 

^ s* 




• .c 



4 


«» 

> A* 





« 


£ 





iMhi 


* 





2 


0 


I 


»-lit. 







miRODUCTIOF TO SOCIOLOGY 


INTEODUCTION 

Sociology is the name applied to a rather inchoate mass 
of materials which embodies our knowledge about society. 
Various Careful students and sentimental reformers 

meanings of alike profess devotion to the new science, 

the word Economics is to be a branch of sociology; 

Sociology. theology is to be driven from the pulpit by 

the new religion of social reform; law and morals may 
be put on a true foundation, the state at last may learn 
its true function, and the family its true meaning, because 
this new science has been discovered toward the close of 
the nineteenth century. Its forms are as yet varied, and 
perhaps would suggest a series of pseudo-sciences instead 
of one genuine science. Spencer uses the term sociology to 
mean the study of social institutions in their origin and 
development; Letourneau applies it to the study of social 
beginnings, and it has been extended to cover a good deal 
of ethnology and anthropology; Comte, who has the 
honour of inventing the word sociologie, meant by it the 
goal and summation of all science as applied to the 
regulation of human society; in America the name has 
been applied indifferently to any study of social condi¬ 
tions which aims to regenerate society. Such are some 
of the claims put forward by the devotees of this new 
science, and some of the various types which it has 
assumed. In view of all this confusion and perplexity, 

B I 


2 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


it must be the first work of the student to define the 
scope of this science, if such it be, and to determine its 
relation to other sciences already recognised as such. 
Accordingly, I propose first to define the object to be 
studied, viz., society or the social group, and to indicate 
the importance of such a study; secondly, to discuss the 
relation of the general science of society to the special 
sciences dealing with particular classes of social phe¬ 
nomena ; and, thirdly, to enquire whether the study of 
society as thus defined deserves the name of a science.^ 


Sociology claims to be the science of society, and the 
question immediately arises: What is society, or a 
society, this object which is to be studied? 
^cieV? ^ To-day many writers talk freely of society, 
and mean by it on one page, humanity; on 
the next, a family, or a race; on the next, social 
intercourse. Those writers who regard society as an 
organism are perhaps the most careless in this matter, 
and confuse the reader by including in said organism at 
one time the world as a whole, and again, without notice 
of change, some small group of men who have united for 
a definite purpose. 

A society may be defined as a group of men who live 
together in relations more or less permanent. ^ Tor 
scientific purposes men are grouped in classes 
which include those who are alike and exclude 


Definition 
of a Society. 


Others; such a group is not a society, for it 
exists only in the mind of the thinker. On the other 
hand the company in a railway car includes most diverse 
characters, but even so casual a relation may bind them 
into a sort of society. Persons in the same audience are 


^ This “prolegomena” to the science of society should perhaps serve 
as an appendix rather than as an introduction. Certainly the third part 
may better be read after the remainder of the volume. 

2 V. Gumplovvicz, Grundriss der Sociologie, pp. 139, sqq. 



INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


a society when their minds are united even temporarily 
by a common interest in the speaker. The family 
perpetuating the same life for generations, is a society. 
A society is a group of persons sharing a common life 
for a longer or shorter time; but inasmuch as there is 
an important distinction between the smaller societies 
developed to perform a definite function, and the larger 
society in which these exist, I shall frequently call the 
former “ social organs ” or “ social groups.” These inter¬ 
vene between the individual and the larger society to 
which he belongs; they constitute the framework or 
structure of that society; in the language of biology they 
may be called its organs. 

The word “ society ” then may be applied to the larger 
body in which the social groups exist. A society dillers 
A Society from these smaller groups in that it is not 
and Social called into existence to perform any definite 
Groups. function, for apparently it exists to be served 
rather than to serve. It does not always coincide with 
a city or other local group, or with a nation, the political 
group; the word covers more nearly the same ground as 
the term people. In general a society coincides with a 
type of culture. “Society” meant for the Jew, the 
Hebrew race; for the Greek, those whom Greek culture 
brought under its sway or made to contribute im¬ 
mediately to its progress; for the Eoman, the Eoman 
world, those who acknowledged the dominion of Eome. 
To-day “society,” in the broad use of the term, means for 
us those who have yielded to the influence of Christian 
civilisation; and we seem to foresee the day when all the 
larger and more important ethnic groups may be regarded 
as parts of one society, because they share the same 
culture and the same civilisation. 

Society object which sociology proposes to study 

and Social is society as a whole, together with the smaller 
Classes. societies or social groups which are developed 
to perform special functions in the life of the larger 


4 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


whole. But while it is only the group as a society 
which properly conies within the sphere of sociology, it 
is evident that various types of social classes must be 
examined in order to understand the groups which may 
be called societies. Life in the same locality and identity 
of race are the basis of classes which all but inevitably 
become social groups sharing a common psychical life, so 
that these classes cannot be neglected by sociology. In 
similar manner the classes which are developed in an 
advanced state of society, classes according to rank, 
according to occupation, according to economic and 
moral condition, etc., must be considered by sociology 
because of their influence on the groups which may be 
recognised distinctly as societies. After this has been 
granted, the student should never forget that the real 
object of sociological study is not classes of men that are 
alike, but groups of men who have come to share a 
common life. 

So important a subject as this has, of course, received 
some attention before the rise of a branch of science 
entirely devoted to the consideration of it. Even when 
the historian has commanded the reader’s imagination by 
selecting great men for his theme, the true student has 
recognised that it is the ideals of the nation which find 
expression in their lives. The study of leaders in 
thought and action deserves the name of history, not 
because these leaders are the only men worth studying, 
but because the study of their lives may let us see inside 
the real life of the nation. The real subject of history is 
the life of a people, the development of the groups which 
go to make up this life, and the way in which these 
groups act together to form the larger whole. 

Importance attempt to apply the doctrine of evo- 

of the study lution to society and to the results of social 
of the Social life has shown the importance of the social 
Group. group as an object of study. It is the group 
quite as much as the individual which is subject to 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


5 


the law of natural selection and the survival of the 
fittest. Among savages these groups may he small and 
subject to change; still it is groups, rather than 
individuals, which compete with each other for the 
means of existence. The members of a group shield 
each other from the full effect of the natural laws of 
survival, so that the very existence of these laws has 
been questioned; but in the struggle of group with 
group they are seen operating in full force. The 
influences of climate and physical environment affect 
the size, activity, and energy of the group quite as much 
as they affect the individual life. Turning from primi¬ 
tive society to society highly civilised, we find that still 
the members of a group shield each other, while group 
struggles with group. The weakest child receives the 
most care in the family; the trade-union means that 
labourer stands by labourer; the great function of the 
nation is to protect its citizens from internal lawlessness 
and from external attack. Every social institution 
unites men good and bad into one social group, which 
stands or falls as a unit in the struggle with similar 
competitors. The laws of natural selection apply to the 
social group, and this is therefore the important unit in 
the process of social evolution. 

But while the study of the social group has been 
recognised as important, and has been emphasised in 
Neglect of developments of modern thought, its 

the Social meaning has been generally neglected. 

Factor in Law, philosophy, and especially religion, have 
study of j:he tended to exaggerate the importance of the 
individual as the social unit, and the vital 
connection between individuals has been overlooked. 
The example of psychology will illustrate the results 
of this atomistic study of individuals. We speak of 
the “ old psycliology,” but psychology, both old and 
new, has ordinarily stopped with the individual mind; 
the new psychology dilfers from the old in that it 


6 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


applies scientific methods to the study of mind as a 
physical organism in a physical environment; it does 
not emphasise the environment of mind by mind, and 
it is inclined to overlook the distinctively human 
faculties which are developed in this psychical environ¬ 
ment. History tells us how psychologists have invented 
doctrines of innate ideas to cover what their study of the 
individual did not explain; how language and religion 
have been regarded alternately as the gift of God, and 
the invention of cunning men; how the highest ideals 
of the race, ideals of truth, of beauty, of goodness, have 
been at one time treated as intuitions implanted in the 
individuals by an extra-mundane power, at another time 
entirely overlooked or denied. In a word, man has been 
stripped of the psychical powers which are his inheritance 
as a social being, and upon the naked skelet’on of a 
mind thus obtained, psychologists have thrust what 
garments they would. The individual person exists in 
society, and any true study of the individual must 
recognise the dependence of his habits, his ideals, and 
all his intellectual activity, upon the psychical life of the 
group of which he is a member. 

There may be some excuse for thinkers who have 
neglected the social factor in their study of the individual, 
Individual- hut I can see no shadow of excuse for the 
istic study way in which individualistic ages, like the 
of Society, p^-esent, have sought to understand society 
without looking beyond the individuals which make up 
society. Two problems are proposed to the child under 
the name of mathematics: If one acre will yield twenty 
bushels of wheat, how much will six acres yield ? If 
a man can make one table a day, how many can ten 
men make ? The vital difference between these two 
questions does not appear in the first chapters of the 
arithmetic. The ten men may labour as an association, 
and no study of the unit will suffice to determine the 
product of the group. The typical man of economics 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


7 


is defined as having social instincts, but unless the social 
organs for production, distribution, etc., are carefully 
investigated, economics is one-sided, if not barren. The 
politics which began with the freedom and equality of 
all men, and yet forgot that they were brothers, has 
done good service, but its fruits do not justify its claim 
to scientific truth. 

Various types of social philosophy have failed, because 
their attention was centred on the individual. The 
theory of natural rights and natural law, and in like 
manner the social contract theory, suffered from this 
defect. They began with an abstraction, viz., individuals 
apart from society, and they ended with an abstraction, 
a ‘‘ natural ” or a “ contractual ” government. In contrast 
with these are the theories of the idealist philosophers, 
who would willingly make a place for society in their 
system. They have equipped the idealistic individual 
with countless social instincts and social notions, but 
even then they fail to explain society, for the problem 
is not fairly stated. And I am inclined to think that 
even those students who have most clearly recognised 
the organic character of society, have been unable to 
escape entirely from the habit of studying primarily 
the individual. Mr. Spencer begins his Principles of 
Sociology with an elaborate reconstruction of the primi¬ 
tive man; and Mr. Ward, in his study of the dynamics 
of society, hardly recognises social organs and activities 
at all, but devotes his attention to the individual as a 
potential member of society. 

It is not difficult to see that the study of human 
nature, of man as man, and the study of human society. 
Study of parallel, and should always complement 

Society and each other. The student of physical nature 
study of Man posits molecules and atoms as the individual 
run parallel. realm of nature, and he seeks 

to explain the aggregate and these units in terms of 
each other. The atom studied by itself cannot explain 


8 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


the aggregate, for the atom is a mere abstraction never 
existing by itself. The forces at work in the crystal, 
or in the plant, are the forces which chemistry and 
physics have made most familiar to us; but chemistry 
and physics are not the whole of natural science, for 
the study of atom and molecule by themselves does 
not reveal the properties of their combinations. In the 
study of physical nature, it is clear (i) that the unit 
and the aggregate are not separate things, and so are 
not to be studied as separate things, but rather as 
interacting parts in one whole; and (2) that the proper¬ 
ties of the combination cannot be fully ascertained by 
studying units which are formed by abstraction. 

It is equally true in the study of human nature that 
the individual and society are not separate things, so that 
neither can be fully understood when they are 
studied separately. It is easy to forget that 
the human individual, when separated from 
his mental and moral environment, is an 
unreal abstraction — a mere possibility of 
becoming a man. Farther, it is true that society is a 
composite whole, the properties of which cannot be 
fully ascertained by any study of the single person. In 
the animal, atoms and molecules interact upon each other 
to produce new results, by reason of their organic 
relation, and the organic whole maintains a definite 
relation both to its component parts and to its environ¬ 
ment. In society, the units interact upon each other, 
and determine each other in new ways because of their 
relation. A man growing up in solitude would know 
some forms of pleasure and pain; he could not under¬ 
stand all the phenomena of love and hate, of anger and 
pity, of sympathy and revenge, for these can only exist 
as man touches man in society. Again, society as a 
whole maintains a definite relation to its constituent 
factors. Laws and moral ideals, custom and public 
opinion, shape the lives of individuals; and in these lives 


Individual 
and Society 
are not 
separate 
things. 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


9 


they are born anew, to determine the character of the 
whole. Finally, the social whole maintains an equi¬ 
librium in its environment, a unity in the midst of 
change, which might be termed its life. The church, 
the school, the factory, are not chance aggregates of men, 
but each realises a common life, each unifies the common 
religious, or intellectual, or economic activity of those 
whom its influence touches. 

Sociology, in the broad sense of the term, is the science 
which deals with social phenomena; and it is in this 
Sociology 'Sphere of social phenomena that the special 
and the features of human, in distinction from animal 
study of life^ . are to be found. On the basis of the 

above analysis, there will be no difficulty in 
stating the true relation between the sciences dealing 
with the individual mind (ethics and psychology as 
ordinarily treated) and the science of social phenomena. 
The individual mind does not exist until it is developed 
in society; society means little more than herd or flock, 
until it has a psychical life in the personalities of those 
who compose it. Mind and an environment that is 
mental are continuously determining each other, so that 
they are not to be separated except for the sake of 
analysis. Psychology is to deal with man in society; 
sociology deals with the psychical life which arises when 
men enter into organic union; the subject of the two 
sciences is the same, and the difference between them is 
simply a difference of standpoint. 


11 . 

Various sciences already exist which deal more or less 
directly with certain classes of social phenomena, and 
any definition of the sphere of sociology is 
imperfect until it has determined the relation 
of sociology to these other sciences. Econo¬ 
mics, politics, and a series of so-called 
comparative sciences, deal each with a particular class 


Sociology 
and the 
Social 
Sciences. 


lO 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


of social phenomena; the student of history seeks to 
discover the relation of these different classes for one 
people and one age, and examines the development of a 
people from age to age. Sociology, defined as the science 
of social phenomena, includes all of these social sciences; 
hut in this general use of the term it is not a distinct 
science, but rather the name for a body of knowledge 
including several sciences. The more definite sphere of 
sociology as a science is indicated when we recognise 
that each of the sciences dealing with social phenomena 
involves a theory as to the nature of society, so that in 
order to proceed safely and correctly it must have a 
correct theory of society. One or two* examples will 
make this plain. 

In the case of economics, the theory of society on 
which it has sought to proceed has perhaps been unduly 
TheSocio- emphasised. This theory has gone so far as 
logical Basis to abstract from all other human attributes, 
of Economic ^nd to postulate as the economic man a being 

71l0O]rX0S • • > 

ruled by one desire—the desire for wealth. 
Out of such units it has put together its social structure, 
and then has attempted to outline a “ mechanics ” of this 
economic society. In such a society, combinations and 
separations, amity and hostility, are explained by one and 
the same principle, just as the formation of worlds and 
their present position in the heavens might be explained 
according to one principle by a “celestial mechanics.” 
Strange to say, the economic society thus outlined bore 
a remarkable resemblance to the industrial state of 
England during the early part of the present century, 
so that these prophets might claim honour in their own 
country, if not elsewhere. While this economic theory 
of society, like some other semi-mathematical abstrac¬ 
tions, has served good purpose in isolating one class of 
phenomena and even making them subject to measure¬ 
ment, it is fortunate that economic science has not 
followed its theory too closely. The varied needs, 




INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


II 


interests, and habits of men have never been completely 
ignored, and they have commanded increasing recognition. 
The rise of newer economic schools, as they would call 
themselves, has made it evident that if economics is 
to interpret industrial phenomena in any satisfactory 
manner, it must have some theory of society that is 
broader and more concrete than that which it has put 
forward in the past. The economic structure is really 
an abstraction from the general structure of society; a 
necessary and useful abstraction, but nevertheless it 
cannot be fully understood by itself. The economic 
group or organ is a social group or organ, with an 
economic end in view; and the principles of its existence 
and development can only be learned by a study of social 
organs in general. Economic progress is social progress 
viewed from one special standpoint; it should be studied 
as one phase of the evolution of society. In a word, 
sociology is more fundamental than economics and the 
other sciences which deal with special classes of social 
phenomena. Naturally, it has arisen later than these 
sciences which handle more concrete problems, but they 
in turn are to become dependent on the general principles 
which it deduces. The general principles governing the 
life of men in society, are the basis on which economics 
will have to build its theory of the economic life of 
society. 

The necessity of some theory as to the nature of 
society, and the importance of a correct theory, may be 
illustrated farther by the example of linguis- 
Language ties. Until recent times, the study of language 
consisted in the collection of masses of material 
from which it was difficult to make genuine deductions, 
because no true principle of arrangement existed. The 
effect of the idea of evolution, and the application of the 
comparative method, have wrought marvellous changes by 
introducing such a principle. Grammatical forms are 
studied now as an evolution, i.e. later forms are descended 


12 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


from earlier. The lexicographer is no longer content 
with grouping the meanings of a word as may seem to 
him convenient. He desires to trace the “ evolution ” of 
different meanings from the simple meaning of a postu¬ 
lated or original root; here, again, evolution has meant 
nothing more than descent; the problem has been to 
trace words back to their “arboreal ancestor.” 

The history and theory of language are indissolubly 
connected with the history and the psychical capacity of 
man. Language is a social product, it is a 
Theorie?^^^ function of all psychical activity, so that its 
underlie changes and its evolution are but one side of 
Theorier^ the evolution of society. Accordingly, different 
theories of social evolution are reflected in 
different theories of the development of language. Mr. 
Spencer teaches that social growth is subject to a law of 
differentiation and integration; forms of social life tend 
to separate, and new organs are arising to perform special 
functions for the whole organism. In harmony with this 
theory, language should grow in definiteness and in com¬ 
plexity, for it is but one phase of social activity. Such a 
theory of the development of language prevailed widely, 
earlier in the century. Dr. Eobinson, in the preface to 
his translation of Gesenius’s Htbrew Lexicon, described it 
as follows:— 

“The historico-logical method of lexicography first investigates 
the primary and native significance of a word, and then deduces 
from it in logical order the subordinate meanings and shades of 
sense, as found in the usages of different ages and writers, which, 
in short, presents a logical and historical view of each word in all 
its varieties of significance and construction.” 

The same principle prevailed in Passow’s Greek Lexicon, 
and to a degree in the lexicon of Liddell and Scott, 
which was based on tliis.^ Another thinker^ explains 

^ In fact, the preface to the first edition of Liddell and Scott blames 
Passow for paying too much attention to the context (especially in 
Homer) in determining the exact meaning of a word. Such a procedure 
is not “ logico-historical.” 

2 Gumplowicz, Der RassenkampT 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


13 


social growth by the antagonism and amalgamation of 
elements originally heterogeneous; one tribe reduces 
another to slavery; the new group is more complex, 
for the tribe that was stronger has risen by subjecting 
the other to its own ends. Language would reflect such 
a process as this; its complexity would he due to the 
antagonism and amalgamation of different elements, while 
its extension and unification would represent the end 
rather than the beginning of its development. The new 
Hehrev: Lexicon of Siegfried and Stade expressly repu¬ 
diates the principles on which its predecessors for half a 
century had been constructed. 

“ On principle we have avoided setting up any so-called ground¬ 
meaning of words. For we are of the opinion that in a language 
'the development of meanings does not proceed from a splitting up 
of a general and comprehensive idea, which special meanings, so to 
speak, represent the parts of the general conception, but rather that 
these special meanings arise by the transfer of a word with a special 
meaning to something else that is special, which appears similar 
to the former or is thought in connection with it. In our opinion, 
the general meanings represent weakened (verhlasste) special mean¬ 
ings. Especially do we consider those general meanings, which in 
the last decades have decorated our Hebrew lexicons and com¬ 
mentaries, as products of modern thought, or, if you will, as 
phantoms, which never corresponded with anything real. And 
purposely, too, have we avoided giving the history of the develop¬ 
ment of meanings of the individual words through the various 
stages ; for we are too far removed from that time to make such an 
attempt successfully.” 


The history of language may be our most important 
key to the development of culture, and the growth of 
the social organism; but language can never be under¬ 
stood except as a function of the growing organism. 
Each theory as to the development of society has its 
counterpart in the particular science of linguistics. 

Relation of relation of sociology to other sciences 

Sociology to dealing with society, which I have attempted 
the Social illustrate by the case of economics and of 
Sciences. linguistics, may be briefly outlined as follows. 
Social phenomena are various and complex. Without 


H 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


pressing the figure too far, we may say that society is a 
very complex organism in the course of development. 
No one observer, and no one method, will suffice for its 
study. One series of social sciences will deal each with 
a special class of social phenomena, noting their rise, 
development, and present character. Politics, for ex¬ 
ample, discusses the phenomena of the state, and com¬ 
parative religion the religious phenomena; each science 
will include both a historical and a critical discussion of 
its phenomena. These may be regarded as the first series 
of social sciences. Again different eras, “ cross-sections” of 
this process of development, may be studied by them¬ 
selves, in order to learn the relation of different classes of 
phenomena within such a section, and to trace in detail 
the causes of change from a preceding section. History, 
and more definitely the history of civilisation, is the 
inclusive name for the study of society in this second 
manner. Finally, special phases of this development, 
each of which touches various classes of phenomena, 
may be studied independently. The investigation of 
institutions such as the family and property hardly 
belongs to a science dealing with one class of social 
phenomena, for such an institution affects profoundly 
the structure of society itself, and all the different 
classes of phenomena which the first group of social 
sciences discuss. 

In the broad use of the term, sociology may include 
all these various sciences which deal with social phe¬ 
nomena. But after this study of special classes of social 
phenomena, of sections and phases of this development, 
has been fairly begun, it becomes possible to study in¬ 
telligently the general character and the general growth 
of the social “ organism ” as a whole. This latter study 
of general principles logically precedes the study of the 
social sciences, though chronologically it must follow 
them. It is my belief that such a “ social biology ” will 
work as profound changes in the social sciences, as the 






INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


15 


study of biology proper has wrought in the sciences 
dealing with plant and animal life. 

This last analogy may serve to indicate with some 
distinctness the exact sphere of sociology, and the results 
which may he expected from such a study of 
of^SocMogy* society. Biology deals with the general 
phenomena of life, and the fundamental prin¬ 
ciples of life and growth; it discusses also the evolution 
of new forms of life, and the laws governing this process. 
It may embrace all the biological sciences, but it refers in 
particular to the common basis of these sciences. In a 
similar way sociology may embrace all the sciences 
dealing with society, but it does not destroy the partial 
independence of any of these branches. It includes 
economics, politics, etc.; but, instead of supplanting’ 
them, as Comte thought, its proper sphere is to lay the 
foundation for these particular social sciences. Defined 
from this standpoint, sociology will deal (i) with the 
general structure of society, its organs, and their 
functions; and (2) with the laws governing social 
progress, or the evolution of new and more complex 
forms of social life. 

The problems of social structure and of social activity 
will form the first part of the special science of 
Analysis of sociology. Social statics and social dynamics 
Social cannot be separated after the fashion of the 
Phenomena, school of Comte, for all modern study of 
natural processes has tended to emphasise the interde¬ 
pendence of structure and function. The first question 
to which we desire an answer is the question as to the 
nature of the object to be studied! What is a society ? 
It has been called an organism, and a comparison with 
the animal organism brings out distinctly some facts 
as to the nature of tlie social group, which it might be 
difficult to grasp without the use of this figure. The 
society or social group has a physical life; it is in a 
physical environment, and the physical fact of heredity 


i6 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


gives the race a definite character. And yet as the word 
society or association indicates, we recognise that tlie true 
unity of a social group is not reached by a study of the 
physical side alone; it is a psychical fact, and as such it 
depends on man’s delight in the companionship of his 
fellows, and on his power to join his fellows in common 
activity. The phrase “ social mind ” is a convenient one 
to denote the psychical life which is gradually developed 
in the group, and in which lies the true unity of the 
group. If, then, the unity and character of a social 
group consists in a particular type of activity, the 
classification of social groups will depend on the classifi¬ 
cation of the social activities. To classify the modes of 
social activity, and the stimuli or causes of each mode of 
activity, is a comparatively simple task; and from this 
standpoint we may classify also institutions, which are 
hardly more than habits of social activity, and the 
groups or organs which are developed in the course of 
their activities. Some of these groups require further 
study. The science of economics discusses the industrial 
organisation of society. In particular, the family and the 
state are groups the study of which throws much light 
on the general structure of society, as well as on many 
problems which seem to open before society to-day. 
Finally, the student is in position to determine the 
meaning of the individual personality from the stand¬ 
point of sociology, and to understand the place of the 
individual in social life and growth. 

The second great problem of sociology is the question 
of social evolution; and this includes both a general 
study of description of the development of society 
Social and of the processes at work in this develop- 
Evo'lution. inent, and also a discussion of the causes and 
laws governing it. Viewed in a somewhat external way, 
the process of social evolution presents two general 
characteristics:—(a) the principle of continuity in the 
midst of change, and (6) what Mr. Spencer calls the law 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY 17 

of progress, namely, that social elements at first separate 
hilt not different in kind, gradually lose their separateness 
and become essentially different in function and character. 
In the general course of evolution, analysis finds two 
processes, each of which has been put forward as a theory 
of development:— (a) the process of dispersion and 
differentiation, and (^) the process of agglomeration and 
gradual unification of social groups into larger and more 
complex unities. Natural selection among varieties 
constantly appearing is said to be the law of biological 
evolution. This law^ is to be tested in the sphere of 
social evolution; the conflicting units must be determined, 
the effect of struggle on both conqueror and conquered 
examined, and the differences between the working of 
this law in the social and the biological sphere carefully 
noted. 

III. 

There still remains a question more fundamental than 
those that have been considered. Is it possible to pursue 

„ . this study in a scientific manner, such that the 

Unscientific ^ ^ ^ ^ i • o 

character result may fairly be called a science f 

of much It may be granted to begin with, that 

Sociology, scarcely any of the study which has been 
devoted to society as a whole, deserves to be called 
scientific. Ordinarily it has been a practical interest 
which has directed men’s attention to this object, and the 
result of their study has been an embodiment of their 
desires and aspirations in the account of a No-man’s land. 
And if the thinker felt metaphysically inclined, he has 
no doubt justified his picture by adding a deduction of it 
from his metaphysical principles. Much of the worth¬ 
lessness of these results has been due, I believe, to a 
confusion of the science of society with the philosophy 
of society. These words science and philosophy are used 
in such varying senses that it is necessary for me to 
define my usage of them in order to make my meaning 
clear, 
c 


i8 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


It is generally agreed that science deals with the facts 
given in experience—accurately describing them, classify- 

. incc them, and deducing from them general 

Science as ^ i i 

the Empirical principles or laws. Philosophy studies that 

study of which is not given in experience, hut which 
tra^sT'phiio^' experience presupposes ; it studies what under- 
sophic study lies experience, its so-called postulates, and 

of Ideals and goals or ideals which ought to be realised 
Principles. . . • • • • i i i,- 

in experience. Science is empirical and objec¬ 
tive ; it studies that which is. Philosophy has a more 
subjective and a nobler task; it seeks the meaning for 
man of that which is, it seeks the ends which man ought 
to make real in his world. On the basis of this definition 
everybody is a philosopher, while the scientific man is a 
late and rare development on our planet; the world 
received philosophical interpretation long before there 
was any dawn of science. And it is easy to see that the 
emancipation of science from the metaphysical method 
must have been a slow task. The physical sciences 
succeeded in asserting this freedom first, and only-in our 
own day have psychology and logic and ethics been able 
to secure any degree of freedom from metaphysics. The 
example of logic will serve to illustrate the distinction 
between pihilosophy and science w’hich 1 am trying to 
make clear. Logic properly begins with a study of the 
phenomena of thought; it seeks its data from psychology, 
from the expression of thought in language, from the 
history of language, and from any other available source; 
these data it examines and classifies from its own stand¬ 
point, and seeks to find the laws which govern the 
acquisition of knowledge by the individual and the 
growth of knowledge for the race. This task is purely 
scientific, and speculation would only hinder its success. 
But the facts thus secured will serve as a basis on which 
a genuine philosophy of knowledge may be formed, a 
philosophy which will at least be able to state the pre¬ 
suppositions of knowledge, and which can determine 




INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 19 

with some reasonableness the methods of correct thinking. 
Logic as science asks : What is thinking ? On this basis, 
and not without it, logic as philosophy asks: What is 
true thinking? and, How can truth be reached? We 
have had enough of the social philosophy which consists 
in a system of short-sighted wishes. It remains to be 
seen whether there can be a true science of society, for 
(as in the case of logic) this is the only possible basis on 
which a philosophy of society can have real value. 
Unless social phenomena are subject to law and can be 
studied by a rigid scientific method, any effort to control 
these phenomena by reason is absurd; they must be left 
to caprice and self-interest in the future as in the past. 

The question as to the prevalence of natural law in 
human society is not at all a simple one, for various 
Human interests seem to be involved in it, and the 
Society and discussion of it has been obscured in the past 
Natural Law. great looseness in the use of terms. 
Students of social phenomena have regarded society 
now as a natural order, now as a moral order, so-called; 
and both the advocates and the opponents of the 
naturalistic view have confused the subject by discussing 
numerous questions under one and the same name. 

The phrase “natural order,” when applied to society, 
properly means the interpretation of human society as 
part of the general order of nature; and except for the 
continued failure to recognise it, we should hardly think 
it necessary to add that “ nature ” is used in the larger 
sense of the word, and is by no means limited to physical, 
material, nature. When Aristotle discusses the different 
types of state as he finds them and attempts to trace the 
order of their development and the causes to which each 
is due; when Montesquieu finds in the nature of each 
people the explanation of its government and of the 
character of its laws; or when historians generally, 
following the course marked out by Lessing, have sought 
to go beyond the mere transcript of events and to explain 


20 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


them by causes; it has been the constant presupposition 
that society is a part of the order of nature. Nor would 
the question seem complex except for the great variety of 
misconceptions to which it has given rise. I need only 
remind the reader of a few of these. 

Earliest, and perhaps first in importance, was the 
conception of a jus naturale^ which was afterward so 
K atural Law deeply modified by the Stoic conception of 
as “Jus life. In this connection natural law came 
Naturaie.” mean law that was universally binding, 
simple, reasonable—the remaining fragments of the 
“ law ” of the golden age. To this theory, which 
influenced so profoundly the later developments of 
lioman law, may be traced the use of the word natural 
as equivalent both to primitive and to ideal. This 
current of thought was at its maximum in the eighteenth 
century, and in the person of Eousseau. Thinkers placed 
their ideal in the past, and assigning it universal authority 
they sought to institute the golden age once more by the 
very simple method of retrogression. In this state of 
nature men were free, for no tyrants had as yet risen to 
oppress them; they were equal, for social differences had 
not yet had opportunity to arise and corrupt the simple 
life. Even to-day “ natural ” law suggests an absolute 
order based on principles of reason,^ although this order 
may not be projected into the past. It still suggests that 
there is one definite “ best ” type, to which society ought 
to conform. When the word natural is used to mean 
that society is a part of nature, and so an object of 
scientific study, it is still necessary to repudiate this old 
meaning that was once attached to it. 

Natural Law should the word natural be understood 

as Physical as referring particularly to physical nature. 
Law. attention paid to physical science during 

the present century, and the wonderful results with 
which this study has been rewarded, have tended to 
^ Maine, Ancient Law, p. 87. 



INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


21 


crowd out the sciences dealing with man, or to reduce 
them to physical sciences. Science, in the minds of 
many, has come to be equivalent to physical science, 
natural law to physical law; to such, the study of 
society as a natural order, seems to mean the explana¬ 
tion of society from physical forces, as, for example, 
climate, without reference to psychical facts. There is 
a justifiable treatment of social phenomena from the 
physical standpoint, but writers who, in so doing, would 
neglect the psychical side of social life in their study of 
the physical, are guilty of deserting higher truth for what 
would be a lower truth if it were not put where it 
becomes error. It has been wisely remarked ^ that 
when the scientific concept “ nature ” is extended to 
include social facts, the meaning of this concept is 
also extended. The facts of social life we know as 
it were from inside, so that they cannot be placed on 
the same plane as facts in the external world of sense. 
In treating society as a part of nature, and the laws of 
its activity as natural laws, I am far from endorsing the 
method of Quetelet and Buckle as the true way to study 
society. 

Connected with this interpretation of natural law as 
physical law, is the belief that in a natural order the 
Natural Law course of events is deter ndned without ref er¬ 
as Mechani- eiice to any activity of mind. The mechanism 
cal Law. physical nature is what it is, nor does it 

inevitably suggest the presence of intelligence or of will; 
so that a natural order of society is interpreted as a 
social order existing as it is, and independent of mind. 
It is assumed that fatalism is the outcome of naturalism, 
and in the social sciences this fatalism has been made the 
basis of a very emphatic laissez-faire, for natural order 
has been interpreted as meaning an order that is both 
necessary, and the best attainable. Beyond question, a 
natural order is one that cannot be changed by mere 

^ Bernes, Revue d'Econoniie Politique, March, 1894. 


22 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


wishes, or reversed by some new bit of legislation. The 
natural laws of society are simply the modes of activity 
necessary to attain ends, they are not prescriptions of 
duty coming from a law-making power and changeable at 
the will of such a power. It is difficult to apply the words 
good and had to the order of nature, nor is this order 
necessary in the ordinary use of the word; it is necessary 
in that man cannot change it, good in that man can use 
it—the basis of social development, not the denial of all 
development. It is not fatalistic, for it is the basis 
required for intelligent activity, that by means of which 
a mind can accomplish its ends; it certainly is not an 
order such that human society must remain as it is, such 
that a reformer is an absurdity, and a new invention a 
crime. A fixed order and fixed unchanging laws in the 
world of physical nature are, though men have been 
slow enough to learn it, the very foundation of human 
intelligence. Perhaps the most potent factor in all 
human progress has been the patient, earnest inves¬ 
tigation of these laws, which has made the forces of 
nature subservient to human ends. The only secure 
basis for social progress lies in the recognition of natural 
law in the social world; when such laws are sought out 
and discovered, then man can utilise them for his 
advancement. Natural laws, I repeat, do not assign 
duties, but they explain consequences—and the belief in 
a natural order is a belief that these consequences do 
follow the actions, in spite of any amount of wishing or 
legislating. The fatalism which the phrase has suggested 
both to the opponents and the advocates of this belief, is 
an uujustifiable addition of an element that is wholly 
foreign to it. 

Natural ^ mention but one other wrong meaning 

Law and a which the phrase “ natural order ” may suggest. 
Mechanics of viz.: It has often suggested a social mechanics 
Self-interest, self-interest, or on some other 

equally simple motive. The truth is that the easiest 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


23 


way to form a mechanics of society, is to take one 
simple and universal motive, and neglect all other 
motives to action. This course has often been pursued ; 
and most systems of social mechanics are open to the 
charge of unfair abstractness and one-sidedness. Such 
a charge becomes really serious only when these systems 
claim to be something other than they are, only when 
their advocates forget that they are partial, and are 
suited only for the partial purpose with which they 
were formed. When they come to be regarded as true 
and complete statements of social phenomena, then they 
are evidently false; and the conclusions which are drawn 
from them when so regarded, run the risk of being very 
pernicious. The study of society as a part of nature does 
not mean that the facts of social life are to be sacrificed 
to a convenient abstraction. 

By reason of the errors w'hich have been associated 
with the phrases “ natural law ” and natural order,” 
The so-called there has arisen a habit of finding the basis 
Moral Order of society in a moral order as contrasted with 
of Society. 3^ natural order.^ The plirase moral order,” 
when used to denote this contrast, seems to me neither 
a clear nor a happy one. It has found its justifi¬ 
cation mainly as an attack on some of the erroneous 
views which had attached themselves to the conception 
of a natural order. For example, laying stress on the 
fact of progress, the advocates of this position have 
claimed that society could be made better in the future, 
as it has been made better in the past, even to the extent 
of a social revolution; and they have forgotten that in 
nature, too, there is progress—that we seem to find 
revolutions even in nature. Laying stress on the pre¬ 
sence of mind as the very basis of social life, they have 
forgotten that mind also is a part of nature without 
which organic nature, at least, cannot be understood. 
They have said that civilisation means the conquest of 
1 V. Cohn, System der Natioiialokonoime^ I. 356 sqq. 


24 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


nature, and progress the gradual subjection of nature 
to human ends; that the characteristic feature of human 
society is not its obedience to natural law, but the fact 
that nature has been overcome; that natural freedom 
is a contradiction in terms, for freedom depends on a 
moral order. In bringing to light the errors which have 
lurked behind the words natural order, and in empha¬ 
sising the place of psychical life as the very essence of 
liuman society, the advocates of this view have done good 
service. 

It is unnecessary to consider their position in greater 
detail, for I only wish to show that, as an antithesis 
to the idea of a natural order, the idea of society as 
a moral order is due to a misapprehension of what is 
meant by a natural order. Nothing has been brought 
forward by those who prefer the term moral, which is 
inconsistent with the “naturalistic” view when this is 
rightly understood. 

I reach the conclusion that the objections to the 
study of society as a part of nature do not hold good, 
Thescien- “nature” is rightly understood. In so far 
tific study as social phenomena are subject to natural 
of Social law, science can use essentially the same 
Phenomena. dealing with them as in dealing 

with physical phenomena. Very much the same result 
has been reached in the actual prosecution of the social 
sciences. History, politics, the study of institutions, have 
proceeded on the supposition that the phenomena studied 
by each, respectively, were subject to law, and the main 
work of these sciences has been to discover the natural 
sequence of events under law in their different fields. 
At the same time, the presupposition has often been over¬ 
looked or denied, and it is part of the work of sociology 
to determine the exact place of natural law in the social 
sciences. 

Science and philosophy unite in making the postulate 
that this is one world. At length, this seems to be the 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


25 


necessary basis of all careful thinking; yet it is hardly 
Society as possible to prove it, for even the proof of the 
part of the conservation of energy, the proof that the 
pr^es^^*^' world is one definite mechanical system, pre¬ 
supposes this postulate. Modern science starts 
from this postulate, and finds before it a single, some¬ 
what distinct task, because this is one w’drld, and the 
same laws act in the same manner in all its parts. 
The modern belief in evolution has made this view much 
clearer, for it shows how we should conceive the relation 
between different objects and processes in the world. The 
world is studied as one process; this study is science, 
and each single science is the study of some part of 
the world-process, or the study of it from some particular 
standpoint. I see no reason to deny that society is a part 
of this order of nature, the crowning glory of the world- 
process, which has only been attained after ages of 
preparation. In society, natural forces are at work, and 
they are subject to natural law, although these forces and 
this law have risen to a higher plane of manifestation 
than the physical. The science of society, and the 
various sciences of social phenomena, are sciences because 
they study phases of the world as it is—or rather as it is 
developing. The position that society is a part of nature, 
and so may be studied by means of scientific methods, is 
not one to be proved by deductive logic. It is simply the 
postulate on which alone social phenomena can be com¬ 
prehended ; but, when rightly understood, I think that 
habit will be the only obstacle to its acceptance. On 
this basis, the forms of social activity, the social organs 
and their relation, and social development, can be studied 
in exactly the same manner as the functions and organs 
and development of the animal organism. 

In bringing such a conception before the reader, I 
think it necessary to point out once more the fact 
that tlie social phenomena, which I would include in 
nature, are distinctly psychical in their character. The 


26 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


psychology of the schools has often failed to notice that 
Social Phe reason only pertain to the individual 

nomeaa are ^.s a member of society, and that social life 
distinctly means nothing less than psychical life. Man’s 
ChCacter^^ mind is connected in a wonderful way with 
his brain; and, similarly, the psychical life of 
society has a physical basis in the race and its environ¬ 
ment. In each case, the study of the physical is 
external and comparatively crude; the essential nature 
of the phenomena is evident only when they are 
studied as psychical in their character. The determining 
feature of a social group is its psychical life, in a broad 
sense of the term, its civilisation; the different modes of 
social activity are so many forms of psychical activity; 
the development of society is the evolution of reason. 
The natural order which sociology studies is in the realm 
of psychical life. 

When this position is thus understood, the main 
obstacle to its acceptance is the habit of holding a 

The Science freedom of the will. This 

of Society place to discuss such a vexed 

and the Free- question, but perhaps I can indicate three 
of the along wdiich the student of society 

will justify himself in assuming that society 
is a part of nature, and that social phenomena, includ¬ 
ing the phenomena of volition, are subject to law. 
(i) Although this position is inconsistent with the com¬ 
mon belief in indeterminism, viz., the belief that the will 
is controlled by motives only in part, the student will 
point out that this common belief deserves to be called a 
popular theory rather than a practical belief, that it is 
at variance both with the carefully considered theories of 
the scientist and with the practical belief of all classes. 
A man may claim for himself the power to act with 
sovereign caprice, but even he seeks to intlueiice his 
neighbours by rational motives, even he finds that there 
are laws applying to human action. (2) Farther, the 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


27 


student will point out that the position he advocates is 
the very opposite of fatalism. He does not exclude mind 
from nature; he does not assert that some outside power 
determines a man’s life for him; the very object of his 
study is the manner in which a mind works out its ends 
in its environment. For him reason is the power to 
realise ends; society wins his interest and claims his study 
because social life is the activity of reason working itself 
out in nature. (3) He will follow recent defenders of 
this position^ in pointing out that freedom from lower 
impulses, the power to feel noble impulses and to achieve 
noble results, the sense of responsibility and of duty, are 
all of them social phenomena which could not exist apart 
from society. He will claim that true practical freedom 
is inconsistent with the popular theory of freedom. Such, 
I believe, are some of the lines along which the student 
of society will attempt to show that while the phenomena 
of volition are subject to law, still this does not mean 
the destruction of responsibility and the overthrow of 
morals. 

In advocating the study of social relations as they 
exist and as they arise, it is not my intention to cast any 

SocialScience discredit either on the study of the ultimate 

and Social principles which underlie human society, or on 
Philosophy, study of the ends which may be realised 
in society. The science of the evolution of society gives 
some clue to the next stage of social evolution, but it is 
hardly fair to call any such foreshadowed future state a 
social ideal. The science of society, in the narrow sense 
of the term which I have suggested, gives data by which 
I may pronounce the new form of society to be better or 
worse than those forms which have preceded; but it 
contains no “ ought,” and in itself it lays no duties on 
any state or any church to bring in the future. The 
science studying facts and laws is, however, the source of 

1 Riehl, Der PhilosopMscher Kriticismus, II. 2, § 216 - 280 . (Eng. tr., 
Theory of Science and Metaphysics, p. 206, sqq.). 


28 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


our knowledge as to the results of action, so that it lies 
at the foundation of the individual’s effort to discover true 
ideals and right rules of life in society. The study of the 
ends of which I ought to seek the realisation in society, 
is all-important, or dangerous nonsense, according as it 
has or has not a broad foundation and a true method. 
The confusion of maxims of social action with the 
scientific study of society, together with the use of the 
crude beginnings of social science as programmes for the 
renovation of society, has already cast great discredit on 
sociology. After the science of sociology has found solid 
basis in the study of social life as it is, the individual 
may depend on these results to guide his desires and his 
hopes. Kules of action and ideals which lack this foun¬ 
dation can have no permanent value.^ 

Just as the study of social ideals assumes its proper 
place on the basis of a careful science of society; so 
Social the meaning of social relations, and the 
Science the ultimate explanation of that process of nature 
PhiiLophic science studies, can only be reached on 

study of the same basis. For example, the scientist 
Society. studies conscience as it is and as it has arisen: 

he shows that it is a social fact, existing only in and 
through social relations, and coming into existence only 
through the intercourse of man with man, and of 
group with group ; to introduce the question of its 
essential validity, or its ultimate souree, would interfere 
with the successful prosecution of his task. The 
scientist takes the same attitude toward the fundamental 
truths of mathematics and of logic, toward ideals of the 
beautiful, toward religious beliefs. In each case the first 
question to be considered is the scientific question as to 
the facts themselves, the question : What are the 
phenomena, and in what manner did they come into 
existence; and the investigation of this question is only 

^ Cf. Wilson, “The Place of Social Philosophy,” Journal of Social 
Science Xxxii. Nov. 1894. 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 29 

confused and hindered when purely philosophic considera¬ 
tions are introduced into the discussion. The separation 
of these two modes of investigation is as important for 
philosophy and religion as it is for science. The scientist 
may assert that the ideas of time and space, norms of 
the beautiful, the conscience, are social products; the 
philosopher and the religious believer may answer. This 
is not only untrue but absurd. But unless the scientist 
has gone beyond his proper sphere, he only means that he 
finds in the study of social development a complete and 
satisfactory account of the manner in which these ideas 
arose ; the philosopher and the believer are at liberty to 
interpret the meaning of these ideas as they find reason 
to. Let the two modes of investigation be kept separate, 
and the results of each will be of greatest importance to 
the other. 

This careful limitation of the task of sociology has 

been made necessary by the large claims made upon 

Necessity of it, and by the misunderstandings to which 

carefully p^s given rise. If students of social rela- 

definmg the Pg form true ideals of a 

task of 

Sociology as better state of society, if they are to discover 
a Science. t;he real causes of abnormal social conditions, and 
if they are to be successful in modifying these causes for 
the better, then patient, critical, apparently unsympathetic 
investigation must first prepare the way. If the philo¬ 
sopher would penetrate the last secrets of the universe, 
and, reaching forward, would interpret the world in terms 
of a goal yet to be attained, he cannot afford to neglect 
any of the data which science can furnish. Science may 
seem to be sapping the roots of religion when it tells the 
story of creation and leaves out the Creator; and the 
“ scientific theist,” the Christian evolutionist, and the 
Christian sociologist hasten forward to the rescue of God. 
But the reign of natural law suggests a nobler conception 
of God than the belief in a semi-divine chance; if evolu¬ 
tion is the last word of science, it is a little more 


30 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 

knowledge as to the way God works; if society is a 
part of the natural order God has established, the use of 
strict scientific method in its study is the way for the 
student of society to draw near to God. Modern science 
is non-philosophical in order that the scientist may be a 
true philosopher; it is non-religious, in order that the 
scientist may have a true religious faith. 


CHAPTEE 1 . 


THE ORGANIC CHARACTER OF A SOCIETY. 

The first work of the student of sociology is to form a 
general conception of the nature of a society or social 
Is Societ object which he proposes to study, 

an Organism 1 ^ considerable school of recent writers assert 
with confidence that a society is an organism. 
The figure is by no means a new one, for Plato and Aris¬ 
totle made it familiar to their readers, and the writings of 
Paul and John have kept it before the Christian church. 
This statement of the nature of society has the advantage 
of simplicity; the analogy which it suggests is an ex¬ 
ceedingly attractive one; moreover, it gives sociology a 
distinct place in connection with the other sciences, by 
bringing it into close relation with biology. Such an 
explanation of society apparently solves some difficulties 
which beset the earnest student, by showing that many 
a fact which in itself seemed an imperfection or a 
blemish, had a really important place in the develop¬ 
ment of society as a whole. And it seems to furnish 
some clues to the social ideals which reformers of society 
may rightly aim to realise; at any rate, social reformers 
of antithetic schools profess to find support, each for his 
own position, in the doctrines of biological sociology. 

Excellent as this analogy appears at first sight, the 
effort to construct a whole science on the basis of a 
mere analogy properly awakens suspicion. The 

Biological sociology which has been produced 

Sociology. . oy t 

by tins process in Germany, is hardly more 

than the description of social phenomena in biological 


31 


32 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


language, and the interpretation of them in terms of 
biological laws. It is neither biology nor sociology, and 
it can serve no scientific purpose. Mr. Herbert Spencer 
does not develop this analogy so minutely as the German 
writers just referred to, and in his hands it affords a 
means of pourtrayiiig vividly some of the essential features 
of social life and social development. However, it remains 
an analogy, and such an analogy always tempts the writer 
to exaggerate apparent likeness. Social tissue, and social 
organs, and the social mind, are convenient phrases; the 
tpiestion is whether they are true and the best expression 
for the truth. 

Ill Dr. ScMffle^s scheme, property is the passive factor, and 
the individual man the active factor, in the social substance. 
The family is the simplest vital unity or cell. The “social 
substance” consists of (1) simple connective tissue—unity of 
speech, belief, etc. ; and (2) differentiated tissue—institutions 
for protection, industry, etc. Society has a mind, with sensi¬ 
tive and motive apparatus {e.g. the executive function of the 
state), with intellectual activity (schools, etc.), as well as 
msthetic and ethical life. 

Mr. Spencer points out that animals have a three-fold system 
of organs ; correspondingly, society has a nutritive system in 
its industrial organisation, rulers and defenders constitute its 
nervous system, transportation and exchange its circulatory 
system. Animals (a) increase in size, {h) increase in differ¬ 
entiation of structure and function, while (c) no part can live 
in separation from the developed organism. Societies (a) increase 
in size both by internal multiplication and by union of groups ; 
{h) increasing differentiation is shown in the division of labour, 
and, as in the animal, the differentiated function gives rise to 
separate organs, and, finally, to a complex social apparatus ; 
and (c) sej)aration from the developed organism is fatal. 


The question whetlier or not society is really a sort of 
biological organism is wont to receive undue emphasis 
Meaning of ^7 reason of the current discussion 

“Organic,” between adherents and opponents of a bio- 
as applied to logical school of sociologists. The prior 
Society. question, and, indeed, the only question of 
real importance, has to do with the truth which this 


THE ORGANIC CHARACTER OF A SOCIETY. 33 

analogy is intended to convey. To the most superficial 
observer, society has some degree of unity, and it is made 
up of lesser units or groups. The general character of 
the larger unity is conveniently described by the word 
organic; and, in this opening chapter, I desire to unfold 
the meaning which should he associated with the word 
organic as applied to society. The analogy between 
society and an organism suggests (i) the general char¬ 
acter of the social unit, and (2) the relation of social 
units to each other and to their natural environment. 

I. 

As applied to a social group, the word “organic” means 
first that a society shows the same marvellous subjection 
A 1 Com- ^ complex structure to a siugle end that 
plexity and characterises a plant or animal. The animal 
Unity of organism consists of cellular material which 
Society. biology regards as one and the same in all its 

modifications, but this material assumes very different 
forms in the various parts and organs of the body. 
While each organ regarded by itself has a certain unity 
and independence, it is immediately connected with 
others in the same system or apparatus, and less closely 
with other parts of the same whole. The stomach has 
its own function, but this function is subordinated to the 
end or function of the whole digestive system, and this 
again is indissolubly associated with the functions of the 
other systems in the body. The further analysis is 
carried, the more complex the structure of an organism 
appears, and at the same time the unity of the whole 
stands out so much the more distinctly. There is not 
simply an analogy in general structure between the 
social group and the animal organism; the complexity 
in which the unity finds expression is the same in both. 
A society consists of individuals who are essentially 
alike, although they become very different as they stand 
in different relations to the life of the whole. These 


D 


34 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


individuals live their life in groups—social, industrial, 
and political. Each little group has some independence, 
but it is immediately connected with other groups in the 
same (industrial, or political, or intellectual) system, and 
this system again is co-ordinated with others in the 
complex life of society. In spite of the fact that the 
individual units seem so simple and familiar, it is quite 
impossible to cover in any analysis all the complex life 
in which each bears its part; but the fact that the 
common life has a unity of its own becomes more 
clear the more it is studied. 

For instance, common political life, the unity of a nation, is 
not fully comprehended in the few powers that may be directly 
exercised by the central government. Each dependent com¬ 
monwealth, county, and town rejiresents to those whom it 
includes certain phases of the sovereignty of the whole. The 
energy and harmony of the state depend on the true vigour 
and vitality of each part, and of each citizen. At the same 
time, the political organi.sation of society stands in closest 
relation with its social, industrial, and intellectual structure. 
A state is not constituted by the presence of military power, 
nor yet can industry flourish and intellectual culture arise 
without the presence, of some authority able to maintain order 
and to protect from attack. 

Secondly, in its application to the unity of a social 
group, the word “organic” reminds the student that a 
A 2. The society has not so much a structural unity as 
Unity of a the unity of a process. In the biological 
Dynfmir oi*ganism, be it vegetable or animal, the cells 
rather than are constantly changing, and the structure is 
static. permanent only in its general outlines. Each 
part spends itself in performing its function for the 
whole, and is constantly restored through the natural 
activity of the other parts in the performance of their 
own functions. The animal is one because the different 
organs are so delicately adjusted to each other that they 
work together as parts of one process, which process is 
the animaFs life. It is equally true of society that its 


THE ORGANIC CHARACTER OF A SOCIETY. 35 

structure is constantly changing, and that its real unity 
consists of the common life in which all the social 
activities bear a part. In every society the units are 
constantly changing, young men come forward to take 
the place of the old. The institutions for accomplishing 
given ends change from age to age, and the general 
structure of society is always being slowly modified. 
For example, economic goods may be produced by the 
tribe, by the village, in the family, or in the factory; in 
these different cases the structure of a society is pro¬ 
foundly different. The life and vigour of society depend 
upon change, but through all change a society preserves 
its real unity because its common life continues. Each 
social organ is spending itself in performing its function 
for the whole, and its energy is constantly restored as its 
members receive food and clothing, new satisfaction, and 
new incentive of every sort, because the other social 
organs are performing their proper functions. The larger 
society is one when all its parts depend on each other in 
one common life-process. The smaller social group, e.g.y 
a trades-union, is one, not by reason of the particular 
organisation it may form, but because its members share 
a common life. 

The important corollary to the truth just stated, is that 
the different parts and activities of society stand in very 
Dynamic close relations of interdependence. This inter- 
interdepend- dependence often seems greater than in the case 
parts of a animal life, where the loss of a foot or an 
Society. eye may have no direct effect on the stomach, 
and even a part of the brain may be destroyed without 
any perceptible change in the other organs. The most 
familiar example of social interdependence is the 
economic life of society, with its balance of supply and 
demand, delicately adjusted and yet inexora.ble, controlling 
all the markets of the world and making the industrial 
world one. Injury to an economic class is immediately 
felt through all the economic world, and it has far- 


36 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


reaching results in the spheres of social, moral, and 
intellectual life. A new invention in America may 
cheapen the food-supply of Europe, or affect the per¬ 
centage of crime in England. Similarly the health of 
a city is threatened by a single case of contagious disease, 
and a single crime widely advertised often produces a 
harvest of moral evil. It is claimed that the multiplica¬ 
tion of Homes for the Fallen in some parts of England 
has actually gone so far as to make vice easier and less 
repellent. Such a familiar fact as the dynamic inter¬ 
dependence of the different parts of society hardly needs 
illustration. The use of the word “ organic ” in applica¬ 
tion to a society as the expression of this fact, is justified 
both because the organism is the most familiar example 
of this kind of interdependence, and because no analysis 
can adequately express all the complex relations which 
exist in the developed society. 

The most striking difference between an organism, 

plant or animal, and any other object, is that the unity 

. « and the growth of an organism seem to be 

Unity of a determined from within.^ The unity of a hill 

Society is or a rock depends on our own definition; the 

determined ^ house rests back on the idea in the 

from witnin. . 

mind of the builder; but a plant includes so 
much as is subject to the single life-principle mthin. 
The word “ organic ” as applied to a society means, 
thirdly, that any given society includes so much as is 
subject to the life of that society. The unity of a people 
is not determined by life in the same geographical 
locality; the Englishman and the Spaniard are to be 
found in all parts of the globe. Nor does it depend 
necessarily on the unity of political life; United 
Germany is a recent fact, and political union hardly 
succeeds in uniting Norway and Sweden. The unity of 
a people is th*e unity of a common life. The same 
language, the same customs and traditions, a love for the 
^ Cf. Mackenzie, Introduction to Social Philosophy, chap. iii. 


THE ORGANIC CHARACTER OF A SOCIETY. 37 


same past, these are important' factors in a common life, 
although they do not express it all. A people is truly 
one only when it has come to recognise its unity, to be 
proud of custom and tradition because these express its 
own past, to be loyal to the institutions of the present 
because these are the form of its present life. A people 
is one when it has developed a self-consciousness of its 
own; such a unity determined from within is fitly called 
“ organic.’' 


Moreover, the growth of a plant, or an animal, is 
governed by an internal law. The word growth is not 
The Growth ^^^^^tly applied to increasing geological forma- 
of a Society tion or to mechanical products; the factory 
is governed extends as machinery is added and the old 
tJrnai^aw replaced by new, but it does not itself 

grow. The organism proper unfolds from 
within, in accordance with a type already determined in 
the germ, and growth is the development of this type, or 
character, when the germ is placed under favourable 
conditions. The clearest law of history is that a human 
society follows the same law of growth from within. 
Every age and every period of development sets the type 
for the succeeding period, determining its general 
character, if not the extent and rapidity of development. 
A church grows, not when it is extended over new 
territory, but when it absorbs and controls new peoples, 
by subjecting them to the power of its life; its growth 
is from within. The modern type of factory production 
may be traced from the inventions which made it 
possible, through various stages, to its present form, and 
it still has a future before it. All the economic and legal 
and political institutions that we prize, are parts of a 
process of growth; their authority is the outgrowth of 
the past, and their future form develops out of the 
present. One nation may conquer another in battle, but 
it remains to be seen wiiether the conquering people has 
in itself the genius to absorb the other people into its 


38 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


own life. Crises come in the life of every nation, when 
some great political change seems to be suddenly intro¬ 
duced, yet it is hardly necessary to look beneath the 
surface to see that the new external order is simply 
the truer expression of the common life which gradually 
has come to demand the new form. The bud has been 
slowly developing as it absorbed the plant-juices; and 
some morning the flower is open. The growth of a nation 
is determined from within; in the life of a people is to 
be found the law of its development. 

II. 

The second thought suggested by the word organism is 
that a society is not an independent entity, hut develops 
B1. Society part of a larger process. The plant, or 
and its animal, is related to others which are included 
Environment. same species; it is related, less closely 

but none the less really, to other organisms in the great 
whole of organic nature; it depends most intimately 
on its physical environment: in these different ways it 
takes its place in that one great process which we call 
Nature—or the World. 

A society depends on its environment no less inti¬ 
mately than do the organisms of biology. Physical 
Physical En- environment does much to influence the 
vironment of character of a society by its influence on 
a Society. persons who compose it ; and, more 

directly still, physical environment affects society itself, 
determining the lines which social activity may follow, 
and stimulating or checking that activity. The broken 
coast of the Mediterranean brought very different 
peoples into comparatively close contact, and the 
resulting development of industry spread a democratic 
spirit in communities on the coast. Aryan tribes 
penetrating into Greece were necessarily broken into 
smaller groups, and the lack of communication between 


39 


THE ORGANIC CHARACTER OF A SOCIETY. 

narrow valleys made the culture of one group less and 
less like that of the others. Where food is sparse, and 
widely scattered, as in Australia, only four or five or 
six persons can find maintenance together, and the size 
of the social group is immediately determined. In times 
and places of plenty the tribe increases with abnormal 
rapidity till perhaps emigration is necessary to provide 
food for all. In all phases of its activity a society is 
linked most closely with physical nature outside itself, 
and the same analysis which often makes it convenient 
to speak of an organism and its environment, has 
constantly led the student to speak of the environ¬ 
ment—the physical environment—of society. 

If any given society is isolated and set in contrast 
with its environment, the most important phase of this 
Social En- environment is its social side, the environment 
vironment of by human societies with which the given 
a Society. society stands in connection. The military 
strength of a society is determined by its social environ¬ 
ment. In modern Europe enormous sums are spent that 
each nation may keep its relative place among its 
neighbours in reference to armament on land and sea. 
In all but the lowest stages of uncivilised life the same 
principle holds good; a tribe maintains its place among 
its neighbours by its fighting power, its numbers, or its 
strength of position; among weaker neighbours it may be 
split by dissension, or lose its vigour, without running the 
risk of annihilation. The tools, and much of the skill in 
meeting wants and desires, which a tribe possesses, are 
determined by social environment. The bow and arrow 
have a given area, the boomerang a more limited area; 
among tribes which use the one weapon a new tribe would 
adopt that, unless it brought with it a superior weapon 
which the other tribes might adopt. Customs have the 
same history. Eorms of government, religious practices, 
rules of right action, and even the minutest details of 
custom in the simplest matters, are determined for the 


40 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


social group in large measure by its social surroundings. 
In all its social life a society is connected with all the 
adjacent societies, and with the development of civilisation 
this connection is extended indefinitely. 

Secondly, the word “ organic ” suggests that the larger 
process to which each. society belongs, may be described 
as an evolution. In the animal and vegetable 
Organism kingdoms the word “ evolution ” means that 
has its place organisms may be arranged in a series which 
Evol?tion° represents, more or less perfectly, the history 
of their development. The series converges 
as one goes backward, till hypothetically some simple 
form is reached, to which all the complex forms of life 
are traced back. In the earlier part of the series, there 
are presumably some well-marked stages, while in the 
latter part there could hardly be stages of development 
which would be identical for forms so diverse as birds, 
fishes, and mammals. And the word “ evolution ” means 
that we have reason to believe that this series really 
represents what we know of the history of organic life. 
The reason for believing that life has followed such a 
course of development, is that we find it still subject 
to the same laws and following the same course. These 
biological laws may (in part) be determined as a matter 
of experiment, so that the student can actually see the 
process of evolution going on. 

In like manner the complex forms of human societies 
now existing, may be traced to simpler antecedents, and 
Each Society ^ series. The complex judicial 

has its place and legal institutions of modern society are 
in Social said to begin with a few simple rules by 
Evolution, ^ dispute is to be settled. Different 

forms of industrial organisation, from the barter of lowest 
savages down to the industrial life that now involves in 
one current all the civilised nations of the globe, may 
be arranged in a series representing the industrial evolu¬ 
tion of society. It has often been assumed that such a 


THE ORGANIC CHARACTER OF A SOCIETY. 41 


series represents wliat we know of the history of the 
human race from some one simple beginning down to 
its present complex life. In any case it is a simple 
matter to point out some stages in the early history of 
a given division of the race, stages which, perhaps, arose 
independently in different places as the outcome of the 
same causes. Thus we speak of a stone age, and a bronze 
and iron age; of a hunting age, and a nomad age, and 
an age of agriculture. But here, as before, the real 
reason for believing that human society developed under 
definite laws from some simple beginnings, is that it is 
possible to trace the process for a little way and to de¬ 
termine some of these laws. Within the period covered 
by historic records, we see each present growing out of its 
past, we discover some of the causes for each change in 
the form of social life, the general trend of the develop¬ 
ment becomes clear, and at least a few of the laws to 
which this social process is subject, may be determined. 
Any particular phase of social life can only be under¬ 
stood as part of the one great process of social develop¬ 
ment, and the larger process is best understood as an 
evolution of many complex forms out of a very few 
simple forms. 

That so striking an analogy as the analogy between a 
society and an organism should lead to false conclusions, 
Danger of by no means surprising. “A society is 
the Bioiogi- either organic or inorganic,” is Mr. Spencer’s 
cal Analogy. c[iiemma; ^ and as the society is quite unlike 
inorganic matter, he concludes that it is not only organic 
but is itself an organism, and that it differs from the 
animal only as the animal differs from the plant. 
“ Organisms grow; societies grow: therefore society is 
an organism ”—the argument of the biological school 
of sociologists can be reduced to this simple form, and 
the fallacy which is evident in this statement, is not 

1 H. Spencer, PriiKiples of Sociology, pt. ii. chap. ii. 


42 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY 


avoided by the rich and varied forms in which the 
argument is often presented^ 

The analogy between a society and a biological organism 
is far from perfect, so that the actual help which sociology 
Value of the derive from biology is little enough. No 
Biological mere expansion of an analogy, even if it be 
Analogy. expanded through several volumes, deserves 
the name of a science; moreover, this particular analogy 
has hindered the progress of sociology by the false and 
one-sided views which it has suggested. And yet, in 
spite of all that may be urged against it, the analogy 
continues to have real value as a very effective way of 
stating important truths. The complex unity of the 
social structure can never be fully stated in any analysis, 
however far it be carried. The dynamic interdependence 
of the different social elements in one great process is 
like the interdependence of functions in the life of an 
animal, in the fact that it is never fully described in the 
abstract propositions of science. In a word, the general 
nature of a social unit, and the character of its depen¬ 
dence on other units, are best described by the use of 
this figure. And as the student goes on to study the 
social group from different standpoints, to classify and 
examine the different forms of social activity, and to seek 
the laws of social development, the “ organic ” character 
of a society is constantly to be kept in mind. 

The word organic ” is used to describe :— 

(I) The unity of a society. 

(1) Eemarkable complexity of the single structure. 

(2) The real unity lies not in the structure, but in 
the one process in which all the parts depend 
intimately on each other. 

(3) The unity and the development of a society are 

determined from within. 

' A brief summary of the differences between a society and a biological 
organism is to be found in a note at the close of the present chapter. 


THE ORGANIC CHARACTER OF A SOCIETY. 43 

(II) The fact that each social element is part of a 
larger process. 

(1) Each society depends on its environment, both 

physical and social. 

(2) Each social element and social function is under¬ 

stood only as part of a larger process, viz., the 
evolution of human society. 

Note on the Differences between a Society and a 
Biological Organism.^ 

The discussion of “Biological Sociology” does not fall within 
the scope of the present work, but it may be useful to summarise 
briefly the important differences between a society and an organism. 

(1) The original elements of society are more discrete than the 
original elements in a biological organism. The higher this organ¬ 
ism, the more closely all the parts are bound together in subordina¬ 
tion to the single life of the whole; but as a society develops a higher 
and more intense life, the persons composing it acciuire more and 
more individuality. In consequence of this {a) parts of a society 
can live alone when separated ; a Eobinson Crusoe on a “ desert 
island” is possible when nature is reasonably lavish ; and (6) the 
loss of a considerable part is less dangerous to the whole. 

(2) The form of the social group is less fixed and 2Jermanent than 
is the structure of an animal or plant. The organs of an animal 
belong to a few definite series, and their functions remain about the 
same. In a society, the number and variety of social “organs” 
goes on increasing indefinitely ; and their particular structure and 
function do not continue the same. Consequently (a) social growth 
is less closely limited by time and place than is the growth of an 
organism proper. Unlike the life of an animal, the life of a society 
tends normally to become more stable, its power to adapt itself to 
changed conditions increases, and much as the form of its expres¬ 
sion may change, it is in reality continuous. And (h) changes in 
the life of a society may be more various, more important, and 
more rapid, than in the animal or plant. An economic crisis 
changes in a few days the whole face of the industrial world, an 
election changes the ^ersonel of a government, and perhaps reverses 
its policy. 

(3) In the social organism, the interdependence of the original 
elements and their aggregates becomes even closer than in the 

1 Cf. De Greef, Introduction d la Sociologie, pt. i. chap. vi. 


44 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


biological organism. Eeally, tlie limited independence of each part 
or organ in the animal is quite as remarkable as its dependence. 
In society, the industrial activity, for instance, responds at 
once to the least change in any of the factors that enter into it, 
and all the other forms of social activity are affected with that 
which is properly industrial. The interdependence of social func¬ 
tions and social groups is so great as to transform the whole process 
of evolution. There is a survival of the fittest man in the tribe, 
but each member is cared for by the tribe. The fittest tribe 
survives, but each tribe speedily adopts from its opponents their 
superior weapons and even their superior organisation. The result 
of the extreme sensitiveness of each element in society to the state 
of each other element, is to overbalance any lack of union which 
might result from the more flexible and variable character of social 
units, and even to utilise that flexibility in behalf of a more 
intimate common life. 

(4) The differences so far considered have been only relative, 
but the final distinction is qualitative and essential. In the animal, 
consciousness is an attribute of the whole organism. In a societjq 
consciousness remains centered in the discrete individual elements. 
When men’s thoughts come to move in the same channel, and a 
group learns its own unity, we speak of a “ social consciousness ” ; 
but the phrase never means that a society has a brain or a con¬ 
sciousness apart from the consciousness of the men who compose it. 
The present difference becomes even more marked in the process 
of development, for the animal development has meant a concen¬ 
tration of the more important nervous elements, and a merging 
of their separate activity into the common activity of a single 
consciousness. In the lower stages of society bodies of men are 
more easily swayed by a single common thought or emotion—as 
when the mob first worship]3ed Paul and Barnabas as gods, and 
then drove them from the city. The development of society 
involves the development of individuality in each of its members, 
inasmuch as the growth of a larger common life is the condition of 
a truer and deeper self-consciousness. The history of industry is 
the history of increasing industrial liberty and increasing responsi¬ 
bility for the individual. The strong government rests on the 
sense of citizenship it has developed in the governed. In a word, 
the development of society is a development of persons; the 
“social consciousness” only exists in the discrete social elements 
which have become individual. 


CHAPTER 11 . 


THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF SOCIETY: EACE AXD LOCALITY. 

Society has been called the third stage of the aggrega¬ 
tion of matter. Such language is scarcely necessary to 
The Ph sical clearly the fact that the life of 

Basis of Life, society, like all other life, has a physical basis. 

Modern physiology attempts to show that all the 
phenomena of life, the sensitive or psychical as well as 
the purely vegetative, are simply new transformations and 
combinations of physical energy.' There is no peculiar 
life-force, nor is there any part or function of the animal 
that is regarded as beyond the reach of the physical 
sciences. All the energy received by the animal is 
appropriated from its physical environment, and returns 
when expended to the fixed fund of energy in the world. 
If science is ever to understand life completely, it will 
simply be the complete statement of the transformations 
of energy which make up the life-process. 

Similarly, if there is to be a physical science of society, 
it will be necessary to show that all the distinctively 
The Physical social phenomena have a physical basis, and 
Basis of can be stated in terms of physical science as 
Society. transformations of physical energy. Physical 
science admits no peculiar social force, and it does not 
hesitate to offer its explanation of energy and activity as 
it appears in the social world. This energy depends 
immediately on the capacity of the individuals of which 
the society is composed. Its character and amount is 

^ E.g. Huxley, Lay Sermons^ Essay vii. ; Claude Bernard, Le<^ons sur 
les pMnomtnes de la vie, p, 22, sqq. 


45 


46 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


determined primarily by the individuals, secondly by the 
power of union between these individuals, and thirdly by 
the environment in which they are placed. This energy, 
too, is appropriated from the physical universe, and is 
returned to this when expended. No part or function of 
social life lacks this physical basis, the study of which is 
the proper sphere of physical science. The truth of this 
study of society from the physical standpoint may be 
admitted without at all overlooking the fact that this is 
not the whole story, even if it does cover the whole 
ground. Other lines of approach may yield new truth 
and shed new light on the matter, beyond what is 
accessible by the methods of pure physical science.^ 

From the physical standpoint men may be grouped 
according to race or according to locality. Physically, 
Physical growth of society is to be ex¬ 

factors: Pace plained in terms of these two factors. A race 
audLocality, ^ “social organism” or a part in some such 
organism; the locality is the physical environment in 
which this so-called organism develops. The two stand 
in reciprocal relation, just as the eye is related to light or 
the stomach to food. This relationship is so complex 
that it is ordinarily impossible to trace particular effects 
to particular causes. The discussion in regard to such 
a relatively simple matter as race colour, illustrates this. 
In general the darkest races are found in regions rather 
low and not far from the equator. Very wild guesses 
have been hazarded to account for the dark colour; 
perhaps a fair sample of these is the theory that it is due 
to an excess of carbon in the system, and that this is 

^ In the study of society, it is important to guard against the notion 
that ph3'sical life and psychical life have no relation to each other. The 
same facts in nature may be studied from the standpoint of physical 
science and by its method ; and they may be studied from the stand¬ 
point of psychology and history and by the methods of these sciences. 
A clear statement of the critical view of the relation between physical 
and psychical phenomena may be found in Riehl, Philosophischer 
Kriticismus, II. 2, pp. 176, sqq. (Eng. tr., Science and Metaphysics^ 
pp. 167, sqq.) 


THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF SOCIETY. 


47 


caused by the quality of the air! Science is limited to 
the general statement, and can only prove that climate 
has a slight tendency to modify colourd 

“ Inorganic nature, even the lowest and the least com¬ 
plex, is the matrix where are fertilised and developed the 
A. General germs of all social forms and organisms, 
effect of which . , . gradually rise . . . and develop 

Locality. necessity of the physical medium 

irom which they came.”^ Progress in civilisation' in¬ 
volves an increasing knowledge of the laws of nature 
and of the means of utilising natural forces. Among 
the lowest races man’s life seems to be an almost passive 
element, moulded by the natural forces of its environment. 
Mountains and seas are impassable; drought means 
famine, disease means death; no real resistance to the 
powers of nature is possible. Civilisation does not 
change natural laws, but it enables man to use these 
laws. Man reacts to the influences of his environment 
with the power that has been developed in society. 
The sea becomes his highway and mountains are 
tunnelled. Disease is grappled with, the means of 
sustaining life become more various and are more care¬ 
fully husbanded, so that the average length of life has 
been constantly and materially lengthened. These effects 
of climate, food, etc., are the more difficult to study 
because they are never simple but are modified by the 
constantly changing nature of man. Man cannot rise 
above his environment, but he does rise by using the 
forces which at first had blocked his progress. 

The factors of the physical environment of society 
may naturally be discussed, under three heads:—(i) the 
Classification ®^^*ect of the contour of the earth’s surface, 
of External (2) the effect of climate, and (3) the effect of 
Influences, things directly utilised by man, both 

inorganic and organic. Under the first heading, there 

1 Waitz, Anthropologic, 1 . p. 38, sqq. 

^ De Gi'eef, Introduction d la, Socioloyie, I. p. 50.. 


48 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


fall influences which affect a social group as a whole; 
under the second and third, influences which directly 
affect individuals, and through them modify the character 
of the societies which they constitute. 

Two eminent geologists, B. v. Cotta and Zittel, have 
explained the most striking difference between the French 
1 Effect of German peoples as the result of the 

the Contour contour of their respective lands. Paris is 
ofthe Earth’s almost ill the centre of a large basin including 
Surface. niore than half of France; by nature it is the 
political centre and the economic centre of all that 
region. The North German plain is the only consider¬ 
able geological district in Germany; and each of the 
small districts has developed its own peculiar customs 
and industries, in fact its own culture. It is impossible 
that the common life of the people, or its national life, 
should be so centralised as in France.^ The attempt to 
explain a people by its land is almost sure to end in 
gross exaggeration, but this is due to a tendency of 
human nature, not to any weakness of the method. 

The physical configuration of the surface is an im¬ 
portant factor in determining the size of the social 
(a) Contour valleys separated by high ridges 

determines the homes of small groups very distinct 
the Size of a from their neighbours. Among uncivilised 
Social Group, rivers united more closely the tribes 

living on their banks, and mountain ranges proved an 
effectual barrier to intercourse of any sort. In all 
history these influences have had much the same effect. 
Greece was a country for small states, aside from the 
character of its people; the plains of the Nile and of 
the Euphrates were countries that favoured the develop¬ 
ment of a common life. Apart from the ease with which 
man’s wants were supplied in the rich river basins of 
warm countries, the physical fact of a considerable area 
sheltered from outside interference and easily traversed 
^ Honegger, Allgemeine KuUurgeschichte, I, S. 182. 


THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF SOCIETY, 


49 


by water or by land, rendered such basins the n^itural 
seats of early despotic civilisations. 

Farther, the physical configuration determines in large 
measure the isolation of the social group. Traces of the 
(6) Contour civilisation in Europe are found in deep 

determines valleys of the Alps, which are so effectually 
the Isolation separated that the people in one valley cannot 
of a Social easily understand the language of those in the 
next valley, and have an entirely different 
moral standard.^ Bohemia is so surrounded by mountain 
ranges that the culture of its people has been effectually 
isolated; the Czechs are surrounded on every side by 
Germans, but their unity and national life have not been 
materially affected even by political union with a 
German people. As examples of the other side of this 
fact, the geographical position of Greece and its oppor¬ 
tunities for contact with other peoples, were a necessary 
condition of the development of Greek civilisation. It 
is said that every capital city in Europe is a port with 
direct access to the sea. Eome’s power is not explained 
by referring to seven hills on the bank of a river, not far 
from its mouth, but it is evident enough that the rise and 
extension of this power depended largely on the natural 
facilities for intercourse with other nations. 

Finally, the contour of the surface determines the lines 
of social movement. Physical forces always follow the 
lines of least resistance. This is true alike of 
the projectile’s regular curve, and the light- 
the Lines of ning’s jagged path. The primitive horde 
gradually forms beaten paths about its abode. 
These paths and in fact all intercourse with 
other peoples, are determined by the easiest courses, and 
necessarily avoid all obstacles. Civilisation and culture 
follow these same lines, for they can only go where social 
and economic intercourse have preceded. Caravans still 
traverse the natural courses from Egypt into Palestine, 

1 Marshall, Principles of Economics, I. p. 231. 

E 


(c) Contour 
determines 


Social 

Movement. 


50 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


and ffom Babylonia np to Syria. These ancient aA^enues 
of civilisation, and even the direction which civilisation 
should take, were determined by the contour of the 
earth’s surface. War and conquest have always followed 
lines marked out for them beforehand. Ancient and 
modern migration has been similarly directed. Some¬ 
times the course of an ancient horde overrunning a part 
of Europe, can be followed in detail, and each deviation 
from a straight course is explained by natural obstacles, 
or by the physical strength of those already in possession 
of the soil.^ To-day, emigration is from some crowded 
quarter, along the lines of least resistance, to the spot 
Avhich seems to offer opportunity for an easier and richer 
life. Every re-distribution of the parts of society has its 
physical side, and, like any re-distribution of matter, it 
follows the lines of least resistance. “ The final and 
highest truths of the geographical sciences are included 
in the statement that the structure of the earth’s surface, 
and the differences of climate dependent upon it, visibly 
rule the course of development for our race, and have 
determined the path for the changes of the seats of 
culture ; so that a glance at the earth’s surface permits us 
to see the course of human history as determined (or, one 
may say, purposed) from the beginning, in the distribution 
of land and water, of plains and heights.”^ 

The second group of external influences affecting the 
development of a race are denoted by the word climate; 

„ ^ ^ and first among these climatic influences I 

2. Influence . ^ . ”, rr^, , 

of Climate: would mention light. The length of day may 

light, Tern- vary but slightly the year through, or the 
perature, whole summer may be a day and all the 
and Moisture. a night. This of course affects social 

life, and by itself makes the polar regions very unfavour¬ 
able to the development of culture. Again, the absence 
of light from a tropical forest, as well as the absence of 

^ Humboldt, quoted by Honegger, KulturgescJiichte, I. S. 184. 

^ Peschel, Geschichte der Erdkande, S. xv. 


THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF SOCIETY. 51 

protection from the rays of the sun on desert sands, can 
but affect the life of the individual and the habits of 
the tribe.—A second climatic factor is temperature: its 
absolute height, its range of variations, and the rapidity 
of its variations. The average height of temperature 
has a two - fold effect: direct, in that life requires 
far more to sustain it in colder regions, and indirect, 
in that this nourishment is far more difficult to obtain 
in such regions. It requires comparatively little to 
sustain life in the Sandwich Islands, for instance, and 
the necessary fish and bananas cost but little effort. The 
general effect of a decidedly low temperature on man 
or animals, is to decrease the stature perceptibly, and 
to check rapidity of development, both physical and 
psychical. Among the Esquimaux, as among those 
Peruvians who dwell at a great height above the sea, 
the average stature is decidedly below the normal. Near 
the equator children are even more precocious than in 
the temperate zone, and it is in warm countries, eg, 
in Mexico, that the ratio of births to the population 
is greatest. ^ These influences affect society directly 
as well as through the individual. In the regions 
of extreme cold cooperation is necessary in order to 
obtain a livelihood, while at best the effort to secure 
subsistence absorbs all the energy that is developed, so 
that there is no opportunity for progress. Near the 
equator the high temperature does not favour the habit 
of work; ^ uniformity of temperature tends to make 
monotonous lives; ^ and with every want supplied, 
man is not obliged to cooperate with his fellows. The 
temperate zone, with moderate climate and considerable 
changes of temperature, proves most favourable for the 
development of man and of society. Such a climate 
makes many demands on men, and permits the develop-* 

1 Waitz, Anthropologie I. S. 43, sqq. Heusinger, Grundzvge d. vgl. 
Phydulogie, S. 211, sqq. 

2 Waitz, I. 395, sqq. 

3 Crawfurd, quoted by Honegger, I. S. 1S8. 


52 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


ment of the greatest energy to meet these demands. 
Here the individual may attain his highest development, 
hut his progress is conditioned at every step by depen¬ 
dence on an advanced type of society.^—A third climatic 
factor is the composition of the air, and in particular 
the amount of moisture it contains. A Greek proverb 
connects sluggishness and mental indifference with those 
who lived among the marshes of Boeotia. Much of the 
African coast means disease and death to foreigners 
who are not accustomed to its malarial breezes. Earity 
of the air, as well as its dryness, affects the throat 
and lungs; and doubtless this is one reason for the fact so 
often asserted, that mountain races possess more vigour 
than races that inhabit low, damp plains. Perhaps, how¬ 
ever, the most important effect of moisture in the air is 
indirect, and is due to its influence on vegetation. 

Thirdly, the character of society is modified by its 
locality, because the forms of matter and of life, which 
are directly utilised by men, vary so much in 
is Modified parts of the earth. Animal and 

by what it vegetable life depend immediately on the 
utilises: (a) presence of water. Man may have reason 
MaSail to worship water as the principle of life, as 
in Greece or ancient Babylonia; or to regard 
it as the principle which hinders creation, when it suggests 
to him impassable forests or marshes. In any case, life 
and civilisation depend upon its presence in suitable 
amount. Again, the distribution of minerals, especially 
the metals, has had a very important influence on the 
development of society. The discovery of the metals 
and of methods of utilising them, had such far-reaching 
effects that the phrase “ iron age ” or “ bronze age ” is 
still used to denote the new stage of culture which 
.was introduced by the discovery and general use of the 
metals. The presence of a clay suitable for pottery is 
more common, but none the less important. To-day, 
^ Cohn, System der NationaloeTconomie, I. S. 218, A. i. 


THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF SOCIETY. 


53 


the existence of mineral wealth and of coal determines 
the industry of a country. Still the direct influence 
of what the soil contains is far less than its indirect 
influence: the flora and the fauna of a district depend 
upon its soil.^ 

Logically, the effect of vegetation would be considered 
before the effect of the fauna of a region, but as a matter 
(&) Elfect of history, animal life has become a potent 
Fauna. factor in civilisation long before vegetable life. 

Doubtless, roots, nuts, and in certain instances 
fruits, were the earliest food of man; but the lowest 
civilisations with which we are familiar have weapons 
of the chase as perhaps the only implements of civilisa¬ 
tion. A hunting people exists where there is game, and 
approximately in such numbers as the game of a given 
region will support. The domestication of animals is 
really the beginning of progress, and the first step in 
progress is always the most important. The constantly 
recurring want of a hunting people was relieved when 
a regular supply of milk was at hand, together with 
flesh when that was desired. A far larger number of 
individuals could be supported in the same region, when 
the animals that furnished food were regularly bred and 
pastured by man. A broader and more permanent social 
life was made possible when the food supply was a bond 
of union instead of a centrifugal force, and wLen property 
in herds required union for its defence. The absence 
of animals suitable for domestication on the American 
continent is one reason for the low state of civilisation 
indigenous there. 

The vegetation of a country, real and possible, deter¬ 
mines the form of industrial life; and industrial life is 
at the basis of society. The stepjjes of Asia 
Ve^ution^ naturally furnish food for flocks, and a nomadic 
people occupy them. Eich plains in the river 
valleys are utilised for agriculture. The discovery of the 
^ Marshall, Principles of Economics^ I. p. 329 


54 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


cereals suitable for food was hardly less important than 
the discovery of the domestic animals; and it marked an 
immeuse advance beyond the latter discovery, because it 
encouraged a settled life, and removed man still farther 
from subjection to the vicissitudes of nature. A given 
area devoted to agriculture will support a population 
many times greater than when it is devoted to grazing 
purposes. Moreover, agriculture not only encourages a 
settled life, but it almost demands a stable social organisa¬ 
tion. Cereal food is really the basis of civilisation. The 
effect of the soil, as the most important factor in the 
industrial environment, is no less to-day than in the past. 
However we may interpret the so-called Law of Diminish¬ 
ing Eeturns, there is no question that a definite density 
of population is most favourable for utilising the products 
of the soil, and that when the population rises above or 
falls below this degree of density, evil consequences ensue.^ 
The movements of population also, both from old to new 
countries, and from the country to the city, are deter¬ 
mined primarily by the opportunities for cultivating new 
soils, and by the fact that barren soils are thereby thrown 
out of cultivation. 

Environment alone is but one factor in the physical 
life of society; it is equally necessary to study the 
B. factor, the race that lives in this 

Expansion, environment. In the first place the facts of 
Theory of j-^ce persistence and race expansion demand 
Population. so-called doctrine of popula¬ 

tion is an attempt to state these facts. Speaking 
roughly, we may say that the growth of population 
is determined by the food-supply. As Malthus pointed 
out, plants as well as animals tend to reproduce 
themselves and multiply with extreme rapidity; but 
the land available for wheat-culture is limited, and only 
a limited number of animals can find food, accordingly' 
the available food-supply for man has only a limited 
See for example, Marshall, Economics, I. pp. 191, 505 (217). 


THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF SOCIETY 


55 


increase from year to year. But man, as well as any 
other animal, tends to multiply far more rapidly than 
the food-supply would warrant, and unless this growth 
is checked in other ways, misery and famine will prove 
a most effective check. There are a few races which 
seem to have become unprolific, so that they are actually 
dying out; apart from these exceptional cases, every 
race known to us has the capacity of multiplying much 
faster than the food-supply increases; and, as a matter 
of fact, the net increase is frequently far in advance of 
the increase in food-supply of a given region. Malthus 
claimed that the natural positive checks formerly effective 
—war, famine, infanticide, etc.—were becoming less and 
less operative, and that if society did not voluntarily 
limit the number added to it, misery would constantly 
increase, and the race would degenerate instead of making 
progress. 

To-day Europe has a considerably larger population 
than its lands will support, as they are at present 
Present in- <^u.ltivated, and the present net increase of 
crease of two and a half millions a year cannot con- 
Population tiiiue indefinitely to find support from other 
in Europe, gources. The more careful study of statistics 
in recent years seems to show that Malthus’s discussion 
of “ natural,” “ positive ” checks, was imperfect, and that, 
as a matter of fact, the net increase in population follows 
quite accurately the increased means of subsistence. 
According to figures quoted by Prof. Marshall, from the 
Statistical Journal for 1885 , the net increase per 
thousand is, in general, quite independent of the number 
of births per thousand. A few figures, selected from 
these tables, are sufficient to show the drift of the whole. 

Russia. Hungary. Saxony. Bavaria, Italy. England. Sweden. France. 

Births . . 49*4 . 43- . 42-4 . 39-5 . 36-8 . 35-1 . 30-2 . 25*4 

Death.s . . 35*7 . 38-2 . 29- . 30-6 . 29-1 . 21*4 . 18-9 . 23-8 

Net increase 13'7 . 4*8 . 13'4 . 8.9 . 7‘7 . 13*7 . 11’3 . 1’6 

Apart from the exceptional case of Prance, these figures 


56 ' 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


seem to show; (i) that the birth-rate of each people is 
more than sufficient to produce the number who can find 
subsistence under the conditions now actually existing; 
(2) that the death-rate rapidly increases with the larger 
birth-rate, so that the net increase corresponds closely 
to the increased means of sustaining human life; (3) that, 
in general, the larger increase in population does not 
correspond with an increase in misery and degradation. 
It is only in Eussia that the rapid increase has proved to 
be a source of danger, and perhaps of decline.^ 

There can be no question that these facts, proved by 
statistics for modern Europe, are, in the main, true of 
Increase of Society. There has always been the 

Population in same lavish supply of human life, the same 

Uncivilised pressure of population upon food supply, lead- 
Socieiies. • , • i • -.i 

ing to rapid expansion with every new source 

of food; and though we may not be able to explain it, 
this pressure of population upon food supply has not, as 
a rule, been so close as to produce misery and degrada¬ 
tion. The check to real over-population is very severe, 
hut actual famine is generally due to vicissitude in the 
supply of food rather than to over-population. We 
may suppose that in primitive society, as in later times, 
population will vary only slightly while the sources of 
food remain the same; that in places where the food 
supply is very abundant, the population will rapidly 
increase, and that this expansion will result in emigra¬ 
tion to districts less favoured; finally, that every new 
device or practice which makes the food supply more 
abundant and more constant, will occasion a rapid in¬ 
crease in population. 

Turning from the comparatively simple matter of race 
expansion, we immediately find an obstacle to the farther 


^ A. Dumont, Depopulation et civilisation, Paris, 1890, gives an 
interesting discussion of the special case of France, as well as farther 
statistics with reference to the general problem. The main value of the 
work lies in its careful analysis of local statistics in France. 


THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF SOCIETY. 


57 


study of the race, in that the word itself raises so many 
What is a familiar language, the word race 

Eacel denote the fact that men are bound 

together by something more, by something 
that lies deeper in their nature, than the mere physical 
contiguity. But while this truth cannot be denied, and 
we continue to use the word race to denote it, still 
ethnologists have come to no agreement as to what 
constitutes a race, and are in dispute even as to the 
extent of acknowledged races. One thing at least is 
clear, namely, that, under ordinary conditions, men can 
only live in groups strong enough to protect themselves; 
the unarmed individual is no match for other animals, 
even if he is able to obtain food and to protect himself 
against the weather. And, farther, these groups must be 
small enough so that the members can work together and 
not too large to find a supply of food in a comparatively 
limited area. Such a unit, which we may call the tribe, 
is the actual working unit of early society; in it is 
developed and perpetuated the culture by which it comes 
to be essentially different from other tribes. This semi¬ 
political unit may contain individuals of such different 
character and antecedents that they are to be classified 
under different races, but in most cases a real likeness 
lies at the basis of the group, and is farther developed 
by the common life. On the other hand, the race will 
frequently extend beyond the tribe, tor the tribe is 
definitely limited in number by its circumstances, while 
a prolific stock may speedily exceed these bounds, and 
make necessary a division of the tribe. 

The essential likeness which leads an observer to 
classify a group of men as a race, is ordinarily due to 
The Eace blood-relationship. The physical character of 
and Blood- the individuals composing the group is origin- 
Eeiationship. determined by their parents; their indi¬ 
vidual energy is largely a matter of birth and training; 
the habits, the needs, and the ends towards which action 


58 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


is ordinarily directed, are influenced but very slowly, if 
at all, by environment. These characteristics, which are 
grouped under the general name of heredity, may be 
called the internal factors correlative to the external 
influences of environment. Blood-relationship has a 
two-fold effect in the formation of social groups: (i) 
Descendants of the same ancestors have the same 
physical nature, and a tendency to develop the same 
psychical characteristics, so that social relations arise 
more easily between them, and can become more inti¬ 
mate; (2) Children require care from the mother for a 
considerable period in order that they may survive at 
all; and the common life during this period naturally 
develops into a higher social life later.^ With the 
development of the family, and the distinct recognition 
of the importance of the blood-tie, the effect of blood- 
relationship on the formation of social groups becomes 
far more important On this basis of common blood, 
there arises a sense of relationship to others than the 
members of one’s own tribe or city, and the race becomes 
the larger social unit within which new rights and new 
duties are to be realised. At the same time, a real or 
fictitious blood-relationship becomes the basis of a more 
rigid structure of the tribe itself. 

The origin of whatever unity the race may possess, has 
been made evident by the two preceding paragraphs. 

Men are or tend to be alike, when they have 
the Kace^ same ancestry. This likeness due to blood- 
relationship is realised and developed in a 
common life. In general, race-unity is simply a matter 
of likeness, accordingly the scientific observer may draw 
the lines much as he chooses; it has depended largely on 
the temperament of the observer, whether he makes a 
few large races or numerous small races. The question 

1 It is said that among animals those born of the same mother live 
together until there is some definite occasion for their separation. 
Espinas, Societes, pp. 459 sqq. 


THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF SOCIETY. 


59 


does not assume any great importance, except when the 
persistence of race characteristics is treated as the im¬ 
portant factor in the development of culture. Looking 
back over the course of history, we naturally speak of 
the work of the Hebrew race, or of the Greek race, and 
we postulate a genius of the race as the correlate of the 
work which it has accomplished. In these instances, 
however, and ordinarily when the race has accomplished 
some definite mission, the unity of the race is no mere 
fiction of the scientist, but it has come to be recognised 
by the race itself. A race which is conscious of itself 
becomes thereby a unit, and its institutions will bear the 
race-mark with increasing distinctness. When races that 
are quite distinct come into contact with each other, 
such self-consciousness is rapidly developed and becomes 
the determining feature of the social organisation. 

There are thus two factors determining the life of 
society, when this is considered from the physical stand¬ 
point ; the external factor of locality, and the 
persistence factor of heredity. The influences of 

locality are very strong in determining the 
course of social movements and the character of social 
organisation. In the new environment the individual 
develops differently, new modes of social activity arise, 
and the institutions that have originated under other 
circumstances, may be profoundly modified. After all 
this has been said, the facts of race-persistence remain 
and cannot be neglected. Two races may be crossed and 
become blended into one, as has been the case in Mexico, 
or the weaker race may gradually die away before the 
stronger. But the influences of locality alone have never 
been sufficient to assimilate two really different races; 
in America the power of the same climate, the same 
language, and the same social institutions, has not proved 
sufficient by itself to obliterate former differences between 
Indo-European races. Without accepting the results of 
those writers who profess to be able to analyse the 


6o 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


population of England or of France into numerous 
distinct ethnic elements, we cannot fail to see that the 
effect of locality on the influences that are grouped under 
the name of heredity, is measured only by centuries or 
by tens of centuries, and that new and higher races are 
generally formed by the amalgamation of races originally 
distinct. 


CHAPTER HI. 


ASSOCIATION: THE RELATION OF MEN IN SOCIETY. 


In the preceding chapter, the social group has been con¬ 
sidered as a physical object determined by physical causes; 
The Social unity of a social group is not fully 

Group not explained by saying that it was “ made go 

merely from outside,” or that it was “born so.” To 

Physical 

stop here, is to let the lower truth take the 
place of the higher—^a result that is fatal to all science. 
Chemistry and physics do not take the place of biology, 
though familiarity with these sciences is the necessary 
basis of any advance to a broader and more scientific 
biology. The physiology of the brain is the basis of 
a true psychology; it can never take the place of 
psychology and logic, but it is rather the condition of 
progress in these branches. Similarly the study of 
society from the physical side is only the basis of a 
study that is both broader and^more direct. A society 
is a group of men; as such it must be studied and ex¬ 
plained, if sociology is to be more than an empty name. 

Two theories frequently advanced with reference to the 
relation of men in society, are suggested by the phrases, 
1 Bonds of ^ social animal ” and “ social cohesion.” 

Feeling: Man The study of society has often begun and 
not naturally ended with the statement that man is a 

a Social social animal, as though this were a fact too 
Animal. „ • 

familiar to need discussion or criticism. 

Certainly civilisation makes man pre-eminently the 

social animal (^cooi/ ttoXitikop), but by nature he may 


62 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


be a very different being. The study of uncivilised 
races to-day shows clearly that this is possible; the 
lower type of Yeddahs in Ceylon and of Hottentots 
in Africa live in scattered groups of two or three or 
four, with no more sociability than is found among 
gorillas. If man is not necessarily and universally a 
social being, the phrase demands investigation before it 
can be accepted as the whole philosophy of society. 

In truth, both social and unsocial tendencies are at 
work in each stage of social development; some forces 
Influences tending to draw men closer together in society, 
for and and others tending to break up the societies 

against thus formed. In the world of any creature, 

Sociability, gf j^g \uiid are the most prominent 

objects, and the beings about which sentiments of aversion 
or of pleasure are sure to cluster. In early stages of 
civilisation jealousy appears at least as soon and as 
commonly as sympathy, and anger is by no means a 
product of civilisation. The bitterest conflicts arise 
among those who are seeking the same thing, so that 
association itself leads to strife, and even in the effort 
to unite men are driven farther apart. But oftentimes 
co-operation is the only means of obtaining any success; 
the individual alone cannot protect himself against attack, 
nor can he win from nature the means of subsistence. 
Under such circumstances the feeling of loneliness 
becomes unendurable, for it is associated with the sense 
of imminent danger. The mere presence of other men 
produces a feeling of security and satisfaction. The 
various forces of an advanced civilisation work in the 
same manner, strengthening the bonds that unite one 
group and weakening those that unite another. A few 
years ago, the workmen employed to unload vessels at 
the London docks were chosen each morning from among 
scores of hungry men who fought with one another to 
secure the chance to work. This unsocialising influence 
was entirely reversed when two or three able leaders 


THE RELATION OF MEN IN SOCIETY. 


63 


Natural 
Selection 
favours the 
Gregarious 
Instinct. 


convinced the men that their ends were better gained by 
union; and now the dock labour, like the older trades, 
is so organised that a common occupation binds the 
workers together. 

In the long run, the necessities of man’s position 
decide between the influences that strengthen social 
bonds and those that tend to destroy society. 
Ordinarily, man must be a social being in 
order to survive; for progress, social life is 
absolutely necessary. So far as primitive man 
is concerned, there is some reason for thinking 
that he was not of choice a gregarious animal, but that a 
certain low degree of social life was generally necessary 
for his survival. The process of natural selection clearly 
results in the development of a gregarious instinct, for 
those who do not learn to enjoy the presence of their 
fellows have to contend single-handed with hostile forces, 
both physical and human. And progress always pre¬ 
supposes the social instinct; a tribe makes progress by 
reason of its strength and its quickness to learn, and 
both strength and quickness to learn depend on the social 
instinct that binds a tribe together and keeps it in active 
relation with other tribes. Progress for the individual 
means a larger share in the developing common life, it 
pre-supposes the social man. Genuine progress of society- 
demands increasing solidarity in the component social 
groups; bonds of feeling, not simply of function, must 
unite these groups. Cases where this does not occur are 
abnormal if not uncommon, and such groups carry in 
themselves the seeds of their own disruption. 

The bond of sentiment that unites men in society may 
be fairly described as mutual delight in companionship 
Sentiment with each other. It involves readiness both 
as a Social to give and to receive, though the different 
Bond. elements perhaps never receive the same 
emphasis in any two persons. It involves the readiness 
to give; to give one’s time and interest in the service 


64 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


of others, to sympathise with their various emotions, to 
make allowance for their weaknesses, to recognise and 
admire what is excellent in them. On the other hand, it 
involves also a readiness to receive. Enjoyment of 
service and adulation is a sentiment that plays no small 
part in the social and, indeed, in the political world. 
But in the purest types of friendship, enjoyment of the 
service that love renders is as truly important as joy in 
serving. Eeciprocal pleasure in companionship performs 
a most important function in welding together classes of 
men into real societies. It is not merely nature’s stamp 
of approval on the utilit}^ of companionship; it becomes 
an additional bond uniting men in society more firmly, 
and assisting in the constant assimilation of hetero¬ 
geneous factors^ 

“ Social cohesion ” is a second phrase sometimes used to 
describe the union of men in a social group. A phrase 
2. Bonds of convenient often serves instead of any 
common investigation of the facts, and satisfies those 
Function. content with a new word as an 

explanation ; hut it is just about as scientific as would be 
the phrase “ biological cohesion.” The parts of an animal 
are indeed bound together—they have a physical relation 
depending on propinquity; but the whole question is 
why they are thus bound together. The metaphor from 
physical science is peculiarly inapt, because it implies 
that the component elements are uniform, and that the 
law of their relation is very simple. In this sense it 
might be fair to speak of the cohesion of a flock of 
sheep; but so far as organised society is concerned, all 
that the metaphor suggests beyond the mere fact of 
relation is false. 

Biology furnishes an analogy that is richer and much 
nearer the truth. The question as to the bonds whicli 
unite the molecules in an animal’s lung or brain may 

1 On the importance of Sentiment as a Social Bond, cf. Novicow, 
Les luttes entre socUtes huviaineSy livre II, chap. vi. 


THE RELATION OF MEN IN SOCIETY. 


65 


receive two answers. Undoubtedly the union can be 
The Biologi- terms of physical and chemical forces, 

cal Organ has Chemical affinity, physical cohesion, etc. deter- 
Fun?t^'^ mine the place and movement of each atom 
of matter. It is possible to ask the reason for 
the particular arrangement, and to get a more important 
if not a truer answer. Biology recognises that the 
character of an organ is determined by its function, its 
parts are arranged as they are, and change as they do, 
because the organ performs a definite function in relation 
to the other parts of the organism. The real bond that 
unites the parts of a lung is the fact that each part 
shares in the function of the lung and contributes to the 
performance of that function. The parts form a whole 
because they work together. All that chemistry can 
contribute to the knowledge of the manner of the process, 
the biologist gladly welcomes; the fact of the process, 
and of the unity which it implies, he knows to begin 
with. 

The unity of a society also is functional, and not 
simple “ cohesion.” The social group is not determined 
A Social single factor, nor does an enumeration 

Group has a of its different parts tell the whole truth. 
Unity of The group is one because it has a common 
Function. because its members are united in the 

performance of a common function. Members of the 
family depend on each other, and together they serve 
a common end in the larger group. Persons of the same 
rank in the social scale perform much the same functions 
for society, so that they easily develop a common life and 
a direct interdependence. In the industrial world, or in 
the intellectual w'orld, groups are determined in the same 
manner. Men hunt together or spin together, and the 
permanence of the common activity is the measure of 
the permanence of the group. Voluntarily or not, men 
of the same period unite in the search for truth, and the 
intellectual group is determined by the extent of the 


66 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


common intellectual activity. A share in the same 
activity, the performance of a common function, in itself 
unites individuals in functional groups. Performance of 
different functions with reference to a common whole 
tends to separate one social aggregate from another; yet 
at the same time it emphasises the bonds that unite each 
part into a definite group, and it connects the groups 
into a compound whole. 

The study of social evolution sheds much light on the 
character of the bonds that consist in a common function. 

In the development of society new needs are 
developed; as they arise 
ties and of they are met by new forms of social activity; 
Groups in and the social “ organs ” which have been 
lution " adjusted to one set of activities, must change 
so as to perform the more complex activities. 
In this process social groups are gradually made more 
definite and more stable, as the function in which their 
members unite is defined. A primitive group with no 
sharp line either circumscribing it or dividing its parts, is 
the basis of the family and the state. A confused idea 
of blood-relationship grows clearer and more definite 
until at length it assumes the form best adapted to secure 
permanence. Separation of the industrial and military 
forms of activity causes a separation into industrial and 
military classes. The function of a group, at first so vague, 
is gradually defined, and in consequence the group itself is 
more sharply defined from other groups. In a word, the 
study of social evolution makes it clear that a definite 
form of social activity and a definite group of men 
engaged in that activity arise simultaneously; that is to 
say, the social group is determined from within, and the 
bond which unites its members is their share in the 
particular activity. 

The differentiation of social functions and social groups 
results in making the bonds that unite men in a common 
activity more definite, more various, and more permanent. 


THE RELATION OF MEN IN SOCIETY. 67 


In the primitive “ horde ” no clearly defined bonds united 
Social Bonds members. The group was largely deter- 
become more mined from without, and the only internal 
Definite, bond was due to those influences which are 
Permanent ascribed to heredity. The beginnings 

of a political and industrial organisation meant 
more definite bonds uniting men in society, because it 
meant more definite functions in the performance of 
which men were associated. The industrial and the 
social and the legal and political forms of activity 
were gradually separated, until each individual had 
his economic position in society, his social position, and 
his political position. In each form of activity he was 
united with a class of associates that were not quite the 
same in any two cases. In each new form of activity he 
gained new’ power, and, at the same time, he became more 
dependent on society; power and dependence alike are 
signs of the common life of which he has come to be a part. 
Each new form of activity was a new and stronger bond 
uniting him with his fellows. To-day the economic forms 
of social activity are so complex that they almost defy 
analysis, and it is only possible to describe the most 
important varieties. Einally the differentiation of social 
functions and social groups makes social ties more 
permanent. A man is bound to his neighbours in a 
hundred ways instead of one, and if the social structure 
is weak in one spot, strength elsewhere is likely to 
prevent its overthrow. The natural sentiment which 
led to a marriage may disappear; but respect for public 
opinion, or the legal difficulties of divorce, or the diffi¬ 
culty of meeting the needs of life alone, may any 
one of them suffice to prevent the breaking up of the 
family. 

The farther results of social evolution have affected the 
functional bonds, and the groups which were united by 
these bonds, differently in accordance with the character 
of the social group. In contrast with other social groups 


68 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


that expand as they develop, the family is by nature a 
Solidarity closed group, and the whole process of evolu- 
of the tion tends to emphasise this characteristic. 

Family Wherever the family has been expanded, it 

increased, essential character and has failed 

to perform its function properly. The evolution of 
the social bonds is none the less evident in the case 
of the family, and in the process of evolution the 
character of this social bond appears very clearly. The 
family has become more sharply defined and more per¬ 
manent with each advance of culture; in particular it 
has been solidified as the forms of activity into which 
it has entered have become more various and more 
definite. The bond once easily sundered, became far 
stronger when the family entered as a definite unit 
into industrial activity, for economic solidarity was a 
stronger bond than the merely domestic or social union. 
And as the members of the family share the same 
intellectual life, thus forming one body intellectually; 
as they become distinctly one in the eyes of the law 
and in their relation to the state; as they enter together 
into new and higher forms of moral and religious life, 
the solidarity of the family is indefinitely increased. 
A common share in new forms of life means that 
new bonds unite the members of a group, and that 
by these bonds the closed group is solidified and made 
more permanent. 


The results of evolution on social groups and the 
bonds that unite them, may be more apparent, though 
Expansive certainly not more important, in the case of 
Social expansive groups. Here the new complexity 

Groups has full opportunity to show itself in uniting 

Extent groups as they perform the new 

activities. As the life of a given set of men 
grows more complex, the inner structure of the group 
shares the complexity; wherever it is possible the new 
complex life reaches out beyond a given group, and 


THE RELATION OF MEN IN SOCIETY. 


69 


social ties connect larger and larger numbers in society. 
The size of a society depends ultimately on the extent 
to which its common life may reach, and on the perma¬ 
nence to which the common life is adapted. Increasing 
complexity of social life requires a constantly expanding 
social structure, and firmly binds together the different 
parts of this growing structure. A complex social life 
requires an increasingly stable social structure, and makes 
the structure stable by the great variety of bonds uniting 
each part with many other parts. The most apparent 
result of the larger common life and of the new bonds 
by which it unites individuals, is the rapid increase in 
the extent of the society thus formed. 

The word association, which is ordinarily used to 
express the relation of men in society, has hardly been 
1 Attractive j discussion thus far. We have 

Forces, seen that man is or becomes, in some measure, 
a social creature, and that he learns to enjoy 
more and more the very presence of com¬ 
panions. This pleasure is often independent of any 
mutual services, though it is almost sure to arise in 
connection with such services. Man is not wholly unlike 
the gregarious animals; society is bound together directly 
by bonds of feeling that may be described as attractive 
forces. 

In regard to these forces, it may be observed, first, 
that they are due to the character of the individuals in 
society, and that they increase or decrease as 
apart or^ie f^^se individuals become “more social” or 
Psychical “ less social.” Even when such abstraction is 
Character of ^-he direct end, it is hardly possible to 

study these bonds apart from the men they 
hold together, for they form a part of the life of indi¬ 
viduals. And secondly, these bonds due to pleasure in 
companionship, are not primarily physical in character, 
but rather psychical. The social and the unsocial man 
cannot be immediately distinguished by any physical 


Feeling. 


70 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


difference, and there is little reason to believe that these 
traits are transmitted from father to son by heredity. 
Men enjoy the society of others when they have been 
trained to enjoy it; social life then is a product of culture. 
Pleasure in society is the result of men’s relation to a 
social and a moral environment, not of their relation to 
the physical environment. Delight in companionship is 
a psychical fact; it is a function of the individual’s 
psychical life. The true name for the union of men in 
society is association. 

A biological metaphor has proved useful in describing 
the general character of a social group. Societ}^ is so far 
2 Functional Organism that its unity is determined by 
Bonds, due its life, and the unity of each part is deter- 
to Common mined by its function in the life of the whole. 
Activity. social group is one because it acts 

together, the true unity of society is functional. 

Here, again, it is clear that the change from an 
unsocial to a social state is simply a change in the indi¬ 
viduals forming the new group. JSTo new 
aiso^p^t^o^^ power has appeared above and outside these 
the Psychical men to make them work together and to 
Character restrain their selfish tendencies. They have 
Individual, to depend on each other; as a body 

they can accomplish what is impossible for 
any one to accomplish alone. The individual is so 
changed that he can only live in a complex group. 
The social bonds due to a common activity, are func¬ 
tions of the individual life. Secondly, it may be said of 
the bonds due to a share in the social activity, as of the 
bonds due to pleasure in the presence of others, that they 
are primarily psychical in their character. In fact, as 
man becomes a social being, it is not so much his body 
that is changed, as it is the world in which he lives. 
This was an animal’s world in which many things were 
to be feared, and a few w’ere to be utilised to satisfy 
appetite. It becomes a human world, in which the 


THE RELATION OF MEN IN SOCIETY. 


71 


important facts are not things but men, and life is made 
up of man’s relations to his fellows. Even the very 
things in nature are changing, as men gain a larger 
scientific horizon, and as they find new means of utilising 
the gifts of nature. The world in which a man lives is 
the world in which he has been brought up; this world 
of experience is a social fact, developed in society, and 
the same for the same social group. The development of 
social life is a psychical process; man,,in company with 
his fellows, is developing a faculty of reason. 

The word association naturally refers to the psychical 
relation of well-marked psychical units. The scientific 
Meaning study of society does not change this idea, but 
of “ Associa- simply develops it. A man’s delight in the 
tion. presence of other men is no mere animal 

gregariousness; it is the delight of mind in contact with 
mind. Individuals choose this social life because it 
alone affords pleasure that can be called human. The 
more important bonds due to a share in the common 
activity are never fully described by any terms from 
biology. This common activity means the development 
and activity of reason, its character is essentially 
psychical. Moreover, its development is the develop¬ 
ment of individuals, and the common activity is the 
conscious effort of men to realise ends which they 
consciously propose to themselves. 

The preceding chapter discussed the physical basis of 
social life, and it remains to suggest the relation between 
Conditions physical l)asis and the psychical life which 

favouring is developed from it. This is simply a ques- 
Association. conditions favouring the develop¬ 

ment of association. Complex society shows two sets of 
influences at work, influences tending directly to aggrega¬ 
tion and assimilation, and influences tending to separate 
and differentiate social elements. Each of these sets of 
influences in its own way favours the growth of associa¬ 
tion. This is clear enough in the case of the assimilating 


72 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


influences; men in the same locality come to share the 
same culture, society tends to become one, and its 
members enter into more and more intimate relations. 
The same effect, only within a more limited area, is 
produced by differentiating influences. The relation 
between employer and employed involves certain hostile 
elements which have been greatly emphasised in the 
present century. The direct effect of this is to bring the 
members of each class into closer relation with other 
members of the same class. The attitude of common 
hostility on the part of a class not only adds a new bond 
of considerable power, but it has a far more important 
function in developing more essential bonds of union 
which have remained unrealised or even unrecognised. 
Every form of social struggle, from war between nations 
to economic competition, religious strife, or intellectual 
ambition, has its effect in welding a larger or smaller 
class into closer association. 

The distinctly physical facts of race and locality 
exercise both positive and negative influences on the 
Influence of development of association. In the first 
Locality on place, locality tends to assimilate races and 
Association. Qf culture. Language is a good example 

of this. Two languages may be spoken in the same 
locality for a limited period, but, sooner or later, one 
drives out the other, or a new language is formed, uniting 
both constituents. Where two religions have been 
thrown together, or two sets of moral habits, the result 
has been the same; one has driven out the other after 
being more or less modified by it. Life in the same 
locality means the same schools for the children, the same 
laws and government for the parents. Even climatic 
influences tend to develop the same habits. Where two 
races live together, intermarriage is inevitable, and a new 
race is the product of the two components. The differ¬ 
entiating influences of locality are mainly due to differ¬ 
ences of climate. While the immediate effect of climate 


THE RELATION OF MEN IN SOCIETY. 


73 


in uniting one set of people as over against another set 
is inconsiderable, some of the antagonism between the 
temperaments of different peoples may be traced to this 
source. 

Blood-relationship, real or imagined, lies at the very 
basis of union in society. Economic relations, political 
Influence unity, even language itself, are developed in 
of Race on the group which regards itself as a race; some 
Association. i.0Pgions have become universal, each religion 
is in origin the product of a race, Keceiving a similar 
physical nature from common ancestors, and sharing the 
psychical life which is their most valuable inheritance, 
members of the same race have by nature the strongest 
bonds of union, and union of any sort tends to develop 
closer psychical relationship. Only at certain periods in 
the history of the world have a race and a society become 
so far identical, that strangers who have come to share the 
culture of the society are at length regarded as members 
of the race. In a word, the physical group underlies the 
psychical group; identity of race favours association. 
Hostile relations to other groups of men have been no 
small factor in the production of firmly united races.^ 
Men may be born alike, but, ordinarily, they must be 
taught this likeness before they recognise it. Pressure 
from outside is necessary to produce a compact union. 
Social struggle has played a considerable part in the 
production even of races. 

Social and physical conditions favouring associa- 

Psychical tion, face and locality, are by far the most 

Factors important; but as society develops, there are 

favouring certain social and intellectual conditions which 
have such an important influence on associa¬ 
tion, that they cannot be overlooked. 

1 The effect of war in uniting the different factors of an incipient nation 
has often been remarked in the case of the United States in the Revolu¬ 
tion of 1776, and in the case of Germany during the Franco-Prussian war. 


74 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


These are roughly classified in the following table:— 

Social factors ; Rank, e.g. Rulers and ruled; slaves. 

Nobility, bourgeoisie, peasants. 
Vocation, e.g. Artisans, carpenters, metalworkers. 
Merchants, wholesale, retail. 
Intellectual pursuits, etc. 

Psychical factors : Thought and language. 

Beliefs and science. 

Temperament, morals, art. 

Religion. 


The most important bonds uniting men are the bonds 
of a common function, of a share in some common 
activity. So it needs no proof that identity 
of vocation, to whatever this may be due, 
is a very important influence favouring 
association. Men are led to choose their vocation 
quite generally by some particular taste or habit of 
mind, so that it is common to find a certain identity 
of temperament among those pursuing the same calling. 
The same work, and the pursuit of work along with 
companions, also tend to produce a similar habit of 
mind within a given group. But this bond due to 
similarity, is only half the story. Those in the same 
trade are united in the performance of the same function 
for society. The work of carpenters may leave them a 
considerable degree of independence, while men must 
unite in large factories to produce guns or carriages 
successfully. And yet, however great their apparent in¬ 
dependence, each class of workers is directly united in 
the performance of its common function for society. 

Nor is it difficult to see that those belonging to the 


same rank in society are naturally brought into association, 
whatever may be the principle by which rank 
determined. Wherever society is somewhat 
stable, members of the same rank in society 
have received from their parents a physical nature 
peculiar to the class. Then they are trained in the 


THE RELATION OF MEN IN SOCIETY. 75 


same habits of thought and action. Quite generally 
they have access only to particular callings, and indeed 
they have tastes suited only to these callings. Besides 
these conditions strongly favouring association, it is often 
possible to point out some general function for the service 
of society, in which members of the same rank are directly 
united. 

We have seen already that those who are thrown 
together, naturally tend to have the same language, 
Psychical same range of thoughts, the same scien- 

Factors tific view of the world, the same aesthetic, 
favouring moral, and religious needs. Here it is only 
Association. point out the fact that the con¬ 

verse of this is equally true. Identity of language, 
similarity of thoughts, habits, and needs, are conditions 
strongly favouring the development of association. Such 
identity and similarity are not only products of associa¬ 
tion ; they are the most important factors in determining 
the farther development of association. 


CHAPTEE lY. 


THE SOCIAL MIND. 


“ The laws according to which the psychical activity of the individual is 
awakened and developed, may be called psychology. There must be 
similar laws also for the whole nation. The nation, as well as the 
individual man, is one being.”—Humboldt, Ges. Werke, IV. S. 427. 

The first aim of sociology is to understand the character 
of the object with which it has to deal—the society or 
The Soli Social group. In the preceding chapters it has 
darity of a been shown that this group may he described 
Society or as “organic;” that its character is, in a measure. 
Social Group, (determined by physical causes, but that, in its 
essential nature, it is truly an association of persons 
whose feelings and activities bring them together in 
the common social structure. A social group is made 
one by the pleasure its members find in each other’s 
companionship, and by the necessity of union in order 
that the group may perform its proper function. The 
solidarity which is primarily due to those causes and 
which is constantly reinforced by the same causes, gains 
a much wider range and takes a deeper hold than was 
indicated in the discussion of the principles of associa¬ 
tion. The proof then offered that the sources of social 
unity are psychical forces, was somewhat negative in 
character. It remains to be shown that the solidarity of 
a society embraces all phases of the psychical life that 
it develops; that the social life of man is, in truth, the 
unfolding of reason; that the unity of the social group is 
the unity of a social mind. 


76 


THE SOCIAL MIND. 


77 


In any highly developed organism it is possible to 
study the life of the whole in its effect on the separate 
The Psychi- elements, of which it is composed. In the case 
cal Life of of society the temptation to adopt this course 
the Social Pas proved almost irresistible. The character- 
istics of the new life developed in the group, 
and the results gradually produced by this common life, 
are deposited in the individual mind; the leaders of 
thought and activity are, of necessity, individuals; the 
highest and most striking product of society is the 
personality which man feels to be himself. It is no 
wonder that logic and ethics, history and economics, are 
studied from the standpoint of the individual, while the 
social character of the truth thus studied is only vaguely 
indicated by an occasional reference to environment. 
Yet it is not difficult to see that all the distinctive 
characteristics of man, as man, are social products, both 
in their origin and in their present form. 

In the first place, intellectual possessions and capacity 
and activities belong to the group as a whole. For 
instance, language is never the invention of a 
and^Thought man, nor can any man claim it as a 

common to private possession. This is plain enough in 
the Members the case of different peoples, and attention is 
Group°*^^^^ frequently called to the fact that the popular 
dialect of a district is the peculiar property of 
that district; but we may go farther and say that each 
clearly marked social class, each trade group, and even 
each family, has its own language. So the range of 
thoughts possessed and used by any group is limited, 
and characterises one group in distinction from another. 
The teacher impresses his mind on the school, the father 
on the family, and the family or school becomes an 
intellectual group by itself. In religious matters, the 
range of thought in the denomination and in the indi¬ 
vidual church is limited. The words “ soul,” “ revelation,” 
divine justice,” have very different meanings for different 


78 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


bodies of religious thinkers, but within a given church 
the meaning of each is practically the same. In a word, 
these ideas are the property of a social group. Only 
members of the same group can really understand each 
other. The same truth holds good of different ages. 
The philosophical, or scientific, or religious ideas of one 
age differ essentially from those of another; the thoughts 
of any age are not directly and completely intelligible to 
an earlier or a later age. 

The primary beliefs which are generally accepted, and 
from which the thinker must start, are, in like manner. 
Beliefs the property of the group. Philosophical 
common to scepticism appears in certain ages, and affects 
the Group, particular classes. The belief of the peasant 
class in Europe as to matters physical and spiritual, 
mundane and heavenly, may be formulated without 
special difficulty; and it differs no less from the belief 
of the same class in some other type of civilisation, than 
from the belief of the educated class in Europe. Changes 
in these beliefs sweep over a whole country at times, as 
in the case of the appearance and disappearance of 
witchcraft in New England. Even in the mind of a 
trained thinker the evidence in favour of a given 
proposition rarely has the same weight as the statement 
that it is accepted by a class of minds which commands 
his respect. 

The common possessions of a group and of an age include 
in particular the practical knowledge, the tools, and the 
Practical methods of attaining the ends desired. 
Knowledge Students of primitive society speak of a 
common to stone age and a bronze age; more limited 
the Group, pg^^jods are distinguished by the special forms 
of utensils, their decoration, and the skill shown in their 
manufacture. As civilisation advances, utensils vary 
more rapidly from age to age, and more widely in 
different groups in the same age. Weapons, tools, and 
utensils are the property of the social group, and no 


THE SOCIAL MIND. 


79 


individual possession. So the methods of agriculture 
and of hunting, of preparing food and partaking of it, 
of preparing and wearing clothing, are indeed followed by 
the individual, but they are the possession of the age and 
the social group in which he finds himself. 

Finally, intellectual activity may be predicated of the 
group with quite as much as truth as of the individual, 
nir j ^ Each age and each people—one might even 
Investigation each class—has its own way of going at a 
and of Proof problem that demands solution. There are a 
th^Group° methods and empirical methods; one 

age demands metaphysical proof; to-day we 
take pride in studying everything '‘inductively”; one 
group uses concrete symbols, and another abstract ideas, 
as its instruments of investigation.. These methods 
and the activity which finds expression through them, 
are characteristic of social groups. Even the standard of 
truth varies with the social group. Many ages and 
peoples have regarded the miracle as the best possible 
proof of things supernatural; to-day some classes find in 
miracles a stumbling-block to their faith. The proof of 
a metaphysical system often is only its own perfectness 
and beauty, but such systems have not lacked for 
followers. Tradition has been another standard of truth, 
physical authority yet another. None ’of these various 
standards of truth have belonged to individuals as such; 
in fact it is by the very nature of things impossible that 
the test of what truth is, should belong to an individual. 
A proposition is said to be true when it commands assent, 
when it can be “proved”; and these words “assent” and 
“ proof ” mean assent by a group of men and proof that 
satisfies a group of men. 

Secondly, it is reasonable to assert that the social 
group has volitional characteristics, such as are commonly 
regarded as distinctive of the individual. Habits are 
the possession of an age and a class quite as truly as 
of a particular man. For instance, each social class in 


8o 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


a given nation, at a given time, has common habits as 

B H b't 

and Virtues niuch from family to family; sauerkraut, beef, 
common to Indian corn, stand for particular peoples in 
Group^^^^ the mind of every reader. The table fur¬ 

nishings, number and time of meals, table 
manners, change as one turns from class to class, rather 
than from family to family. Habits of family organisa¬ 
tion, of marriage and divorce, mark one country and one 
age. Habits of social intercourse, such as the time and 
manner of calls, the character of social gatherings, the 
mode of entertainment and topics of conversation at such 
gatherings, the extent and character of the groups that have 
social intercourse with each other: all these are determined 
by the habits of the class and age in question. In particular, 
habits of virtue are the property of the group. It is part 
of the history of ethics, as yet largely unwritten, to show 
that the virtues men prize and cultivate have varied from 
age to age, in different nations, and even in different 
families. It is an evident fact that truth-telling, 
generosity, patience, pertinacity, justice, receive very 
different emphasis in different families; the habits of 
virtue vary in these families, and the persons who go out 
from them ordinarily carry with them the virtues of the 
group in which their character has been formed. The 
history of virtues, like the history of other habits, can 
only be written from the standpoint of the group, never 
from the standpoint of the individual; this fact alone 
justifies the statement that habits belong to the group. 

And not merely the history of virtues, but the judg¬ 
ment of action as well, conscience itself, is a social fact. 
Judgment of ^^^^tever the origin of conscience, it is to-day 
action by the application of the group’s standard to the 
Conscience a action of the member of the group. “ By the 
Social Fact, knowledge of sin ” is nothing but a 

statement of the fact, that the sanction of the law of 
the state, or of the precept of the church, or of public 


THE SOCIAL MIND. 


8 i 


opinion, is the power that wakens conscience. The 
child’s conscience is just as truly a family product as his 
power to use language. Whole races seem to us to lack 
conscience, either because we cannot understand the 
content of right and wrong which it enforces, or often¬ 
times because the common life and culture of the group 
is so little developed that the feeble germ of a future 
conscience cannot as yet be detected.^ The religious man 
hears God’s voice in the commands of duty as he hears it 
in the revelation of truth, but both the command or 
revelation and the power to apprehend them come through 
his share in social life. 

The earliest ethical reflection has generally taken the 
form of a search for the highest good; and this is natural. 
Ends of ^ nian’s first conscious effort to regulate his 

Action and effort to attain some definite 

Ideals end. The immediate concrete end of action is 
th^Grou^° evidently a social fact. No boy cultivates skill 
in playing marbles when his companions dis¬ 
dain it; a man seeks to run his loom well, or tell a story 
well, because these accomplishments are prized by the 
group of which he is a member. And the great ends 
which are gradually being worked out in society, often 
unconsciously so far as the members of society are con¬ 
cerned, can never be the property of a single person. It 
IS true that they find their highest realisation in the 
person of individuals, but only because such individuals 
are the genuine product of society. Spencer distinguishes 
military societies and industrial societies;' others have 
added to this list an ethical type, now supposed to be in 
process of realisation. In each case the type is a social 
product. To take a particular example, each church 

1 Many efforts of a rather absurd character have been made to deduce 
conscience from other factors of the individual’s psychical life; the real 
reason for their failure is to be found in the fact that conscience is not 
developed by the interaction of a ^oup of feelings and ideas, be they 
ever so altruistic, but rather by the interaction of gradually developing 
personalities. 

G 


o2 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


to-day has a special type of religious experience which it 
seeks to cultivate among its members, and when one’s 
view is extended beyond the present century, these types 
vary even more widely. Members of a church have a 
similar religious life, because that type is the social 
product and the social possession of their church. 

Thirdly, the group may truly be said to have its 
own emotional life. ]N’othing develops the sense of 
C Types of ^individuality so distinctly as the feeling of 
Feeling joy or sorrow, of satisfaction, or of eager 

mark the desire, which man calls most peculiarly his 

Social Group. , ,, j. i • • t • i i 

^ own; yet even these are not his individual 

possession. He develops the capacity for them by his 
intercourse with his fellows; the immediate occasion of 
any particular feeling is quite generally found in some 
particular relation to the human world of which he is 
a part; and, whatever its occasion, each new feeling 
has a tendency to communicate itself to all that come 
in contact with it. The communication of feeling, of 
course, takes place most readily when a body of persons 
is subject to the same exciting cause of feeling. Empty 
benches do not inspire an orator, and what is even more 
true, they do not inspire the scattered members of the 
audience. The revivalist preacher gets his audience to 
sing together, and the wave of common feeling will 
respond to appeals of another character. Enthusiasm is 
a social product, just as coals burn together. Common 
types of feeling have come to mark each age and each 
nation. Therfe was an age of chivalry, an age called the 
Hew" Birth, the Renaissance, and there has been many an 
age marked by doubt and despair. A nation, too, may be 
described by its tone of feeling—the French people are 
called witty, gay, and careless, having much spirit, and 
little power of perseverance; North Germany is said to 
be marked by a melancholy dreaminess, and by great 
energy and devotion wdien the people are once roused. 
Such characterisations are likely to contain quite as 


THE SOCIAL MIND. 


83 


much falsehood as truth; yet the fact is recognised by 
every traveller, that the types of feeling in the peoples 
among whom he goes are different enough from what he 
has been accustomed to at home. 

The final characteristic of the individual’s mental life 
is his self-consciousness; he learns to feel the unity of 
Self-con- himself, as over against the unity of his 
sciousness world. In some cases, the social group ‘is 
of the wholly without this recognition of a common 
Social Group, Those who speak the same 

language are hardly likely to perceive that they share a 
mental life in common; the consciousness of it only arises 
when a man meets those with whom he can converse 
freely, after passing some time in lands where only a 
strange language is heard. ' The different industrial 
classes and social classes in a city only recognise the 
common life of the class, when this life is emphasised by 
contrast with some other type, or by conflict of class 
with class. The recognition of a common life and of 
common ends in life is the true basis of the unity of a 
social group; until this takes place, the unity is a possi¬ 
bility to be realised, the common life is only incipient. 
Sometimes physical separateness suggests the fact that a 
group has a unity of its own. Children feel that the 
family has a common life, since the life of the home is 
separated at so many points from all the rest of the 
world. Or pleasure in a certain set of companions may 
emphasise the unity of that particular set; as when a 
school develops a common life that is not limited to the 
intellectual side. Frequently pressure from outside 
throws men together, and makes them feel that their only 
interests are such as are common to the whole class. The 
efforts of labourers to secure what they regard as their 
rights, unite them by firm bonds into a “union,” and 
favour the belief that the individual has no interest 
apart from the class. Thus a somewhat exaggerated 
self-consciousness is developed under pressure, iinally. 


84 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


it may be said that every society formed with the 
purpose of encouraging and developing some form of 
common life, presupposes recognition of a common life 
already existing. A church is formed by persons who 
have recognised that they already share a common 
religious life; the friends of “ law and order ” form a 
society because such a union aids them to act together, 
but doubtless they have long been conscious that they 
shared with each other common thoughts, feelings, and 
purposes. 

The recognition that the group is by nature a unity 
is more distinct, however, when some element of pur- 
Seif-con- underlies the union. When a society 

sciousness of is definitely formed to carry out a definite 
the Volitional purpose, its members are separated from the 
Group. world, their common life is em¬ 

phasised as the basis of this separateness, and this is 
done by their choice. Under these circumstances, the 
consciousness of a common life, a common self, some¬ 
times becomes quite as vivid as the individual’s self- 
consciousness. The industrial corporation develops the 
common life and the consciousness of it along narrow 
lines; the family, at the opposite extreme, develops a 
common life along the whole range of human interests, 
and the self-consciousness of such a group may easily 
eclipse the individual self-consciousness of husband or 
wife. Every great crusade against ignorance, corruption, 
or evil of any form, every earnest effort to realise high 
ideals in the world, demands union among those who would 
carry it forward; the voluntary group thus formed cannot 
fail to have a vivid consciousness of its common life. 

_ _ ^ The question as to the unity of the social 

The Unity of . , , . , , 

the Social iiimd becomes clearer when the nature of the 

Mind and of unity of the individual mind is considered. 

mind of the individual is, indeed, the 
function ot a particular physical structure; 
but its true unity is rather psychical than physical. 


THE SOCIAL MIND. 


85 


The mind is a unity because all thoughts, feelings, acts, 
are referred to a common subject in self-consciousness; 
the consciousness of this subject is gradually developed, 
thoughts and feelings are gradually organised, voluntary 
acts are brought more under the influence of a definite 
ideal, until at length the unity of a person stands out 
clearly in all the complexity of mental life. It may, of 
course, be possible to find a sort of physical unity of the 
social group; the question is unimportant, for the real 
unity of mind is not a physical but a psychical matter. 
Such a psychical unity is developed in the social group, 
though the development is gradual, and takes place 
in different degrees. Wherever a group is subject to 
influences developing its common life, the common 
thoughts and beliefs and feelings are gradually organised 
into a complex unity, more definite ideas control the 
active life of the group, and the consciousness of the 
essential unity of the whole at length pervades the life 
of each member. A society is no mere conglomerate of 
men that are alike, no mere association which men may 
share or leave at will; the solidarity of the social group 
that has been indefinitely and imperfectly described by 
the word organic,” finds its true explanation in the 
psychical life of the group. 

“Social mind” and “Zeitgeist” are phrases easy to 
use, particularly easy to use without any definite mean- 
“ Social chapter I have 

Mind” a simply attempted to give a definite concrete 
Concrete meaning to the former plirase, so that it could 
Phrase. profitably used to describe the psychical 

character of the social group. The different groups 
which go to make up society in a given nation or a given 
race, are determined in various ways; physical contiguity 
or desire for companionship may have been the original 
deciding factor; but the real unity of each group con¬ 
sists in the common mental life which is gradually 
acquired. This is the true statement of the essential 


86 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


nature of a society. A group of men becomes really one 
as a common mental life is developed among them; they 
learn to call themselves one when at length they recog¬ 
nise this common mental life. 

At this point the question naturally arises whether it is 
advantageous for society that this unity express itself in the 
outward form of some institution. The cry is often raised that 
our age spends its life in conventions, associations, and the like, 
while the ends which really demand our effort are obscured 
by the machinery for accomplishing them. Undoubtedly the 
machine is often a form which takes the place of real life ; too 
easily it becomes an end in itself, and so can no longer justify 
its own existence. Still those who raise this cry may forget 
that the forms of social activity are really becoming more 
widely differentiated in this age as in the ages that have pre¬ 
ceded it, and institutions are necessary to the neAv forms of 
common life. In spite of all the dangers that attend insti¬ 
tutions, where a genuine common life demands an outward 
organisation as the means for realising its ends, the utility 
of such an organisation can hardly be doubted. 

The only recognition of the dependence of the in¬ 
dividual mind on the social medium which appears in 
current thought, is indicated by the word 
the Social “ environment.” The doctrine of environ- 
Mind and the ment simply recognises the fact of this 
dependence on the social medium, without 
going on to study its meaning either for the 
individual or for society. Animal life involves a series 
of changes in correspondence with the changing circum¬ 
stances in which it is placed; these circumstances are 
called its environment, accordingly it is correct to say 
that its life is in large measure determined by its en¬ 
vironment. The metaphor from biology has only a 
partial truth, when it is applied to minds in their 
relation to the social medium. Its truth consists in 
the fact of constant vital dependence which marks this 
relation; its error is that it always seems to separate 
the individual from that of which he really forms a part. 


THE SOCIAL MIND. 


87 


In biology this error is unimportant, for social relations 
are the least essential part of the influences which effect 
the physical life of an organism. When, however, the 
figure is transferred to the psychical sphere, the error 
is unduly exaggerated; the environment which is by far 
the most potent to mould the developing mind, is just 
that common psychical life of which the individual 
is a constituent factor.^ Indeed, the psychical environ¬ 
ment is nothing but a series of such minds, and the 
whole question to be solved is the principle of their 
relation. 

The common life of a social group is essentially the 
union of the ideas, the wills, and the feelings of men 
The Social have been thrown together in the attain- 

Mind exists ment of common ends. Such a union arises as 
in and result of a psychical change of individuals 

dividual composing the group, so that perhaps it is 
Minds com- fair to say that it consists of the common 
posing It. features in the mental life of these individuals. 
Psychical life is no secretion of a single man’s brain; 
psychical life means that different minds are working 
together in the same activity, and this psychical life is 
a common life of the group. The factors of the social 
group are indeed distinct, and their real independence 
increases as it has larger field with the increasing 
psychical life; the mental life of the group exists in 
and through its members. In a word, the social mind 
has no existence outside the minds of the members of 
the group, and these individuals have no real mental 
life, except as they enter into the common life of which 
they form a part. In carrying out this doctrine, it is 
of course important to bear in mind that the group in 
which the individual finds and develops his psychical life, 
is ordinarily not simple, but very complex, and that this 
relation is in large measure independent of time. 

In conclusion, I desire to remind the reader that the 
^ Zeitschrift fiir Volkerpsychologie, III. S. 53. 


88 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


social mind and all its powers are the product of associa- 
The Social individuals enter into the psychical 

Mind the relation described by this word, psychical life 
Product of is developed at the same time for the members 
Association. group and for the group as a whole. 

Accordingly, every thing that favours a more active 
interrelation of nascent minds, favours equally the 
development of the social mind which is the essence 
of society. When groups or individuals, with different 
training, are brought in contact with each other, the 
conditions of progress are fulfilled, for progress is the 
broadening and deepening of common life. In the com¬ 
plex relations of modern society there exists the best 
basis for mental achievement which the world has as 
yet produced, for this complex life means the constant 
and energetic inter-activity of factors by nature very 
different. 


The Science of Society, and the Sciences op Man. 


The fundamental importance of the science of society is most 
clearly seen from the standpoint of the present chapter. In 
general terms, the close relation of sociology, psychology, and 
history, could be outlined in the introduction. At this point, 
the character of the interrelation of the sciences is made more 
definite, and the contribution of sociology to their progress can 
be more distinctly outlined. 

The study of the social mind, the mind of the social group, has 
already made it evident that a true science of history will deal 
with groups rather than with individuals. It is true 
enough that the great pnan, the leader in historical 
changes, is the heightened example of the type of 
a class ; motives and infiuences may be more easily 
detected by studying such an example, and forces 
at work in history may thus be presented to the student with 
greater vividness. The fact remains that the real source of political 
changes is to be found in the life of the nation, and of the classes 
composing the nation ; and the thorough student of history must 
be equipped with what sociology has to teach as to the nature 
of the social group. The more limited history of civilisation deals 
solely with the social group ; and, in fact, its whole aim is to give a 


Sociology 
and History, 
especially the 
History of 
Civilisation. 


THE SOCIAL MIND, 


89 


record of the growing content of the social mind, together with the 
causes of the growth. It starts with the recognition of the social 
mind, and its success is conditioned by a knowledge of the nature 
of this mind. It studies the developing civilisation of a particular 
group, and here, too, its success depends on a knowledge of the 
laws that govern the development of social groups in all their 
various aspects. 

Volumes have been written to show how the complex processes 
of the developed mind have been evolved out of some sinijDle 
- . , , process, that can be explained in terms of simple 

Sociology and ’ . . N . . i 

the Genesis of nervous action in the brain, bometimes the child s 

Psychical development has been made the basis of this study ; 

Processes. more commonly it has proceeded on hypothetical 

grounds ; the end remains the same, ws., to explain the evolution 
of complex psychical processes out of simple elements. Much 
of this labour would have been spared, or, at any rate, it would 
have been turned into a jirofitable channel, if the student had 
recognised that this evolution is not a feature of the individual 
mind, but of the social mind. The individual mind receives these 
capacities as a gift from its social environment; more exactly, it 
develops these capacities by sharing more and more completely 
in the social mind of which it is destined to form a part. The 
manner in which it develops these capacities and processes may 
or may not imitate the manner in which they were originally 
acquired ; in any case, the true place to solve the problems of 
psychogenesis is in the history of the social mind, and not in 
the history of the individual mind. Even the theory of natural 
selection, with all the new light it has shed on this matter, does not 
permit the student to lose sight of the social group. Kaces, or 
groups of men, rather than individual men, are the units to the 
survival of which progress is due ; and in this process the social 
mind which enables the group best to meet the conditions of life, 
is favoured and developed. 

A glance at races in different stages of development is sufficient 
to show that the interest in particular objects, and the power to 
j concentrate attention upon particular objects, varies 

Attention and rr,, • • i i • t -i i i 

Comparison, greatly. Tliis interest and power the individual shares 

Generalisation, with the group, and the factors at work in its develop- 

ment can only be understood by a study of the group- 

life. In a word, the power of abstraction and attention is the result 

of association. As men and groups of men with different training 

and education are brought into living relation with each other, the 

same objects come to be regarded from different sides, until their 

individuality stands out with greater distinctness. Each member 


90 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


of the new group brings an interest in a slightly different set of 
things, so that the range of interest for the group is enlarged. 
Finally, natural selection tends to perpetuate each genuine acquire¬ 
ment in breadth of interest, and particularly in the power to 
apjDrehend individual things with greater distinctness and definite¬ 
ness. The evolution of the power of attention is to be studied in 
the social mind, for it originates here.— Similarly the power of 
generalisation and classification is a social product, not to be 
explained by any study of the individual mind. Different stages 
of civilisation show this power in very diflerent degrees. The 
savage can count up to five, or, perhaps, ten. The Australians, 
it is said, have a rich vocabulary of words for birds and fishes, but 
no general word for bird or fish. Some tribes of North American 
Indians had different words for “my father” and “your father,” not 
having reached so abstract a word as “ father.” This habit of mind, 
like the habit of attention to particular objects, the individual gets 
from society by taking the place open to him in the mental life of 
the group. It is in the social mind that its genesis is to be studied, 
for it is a product of association. The very desire to communicate 
with one’s fellows, and the evolution of language to which this 
desire leads, have a great influence in training the mind to neglect 
unimportant differences, and to seize on the deeper likeness. By 
the thought-intercourse of different social factors, a scientific idea of 
the world is gradually formed and filled out ; in this process the 
individual’s powers are ever being quickened and developed. The 
contact and amalgamation of different groups, whatever quickens 
intercourse, will thus have its effect on the development of the 
psychical powers. Here, again, natural selection tends to perpetuate 
real acquirements, for a higher and truer idea of the world enables 
a tribe better to cope with the physical and psychical world in which 
it has to wdn a place for itself. Memory, too ; the power of judg¬ 
ment by which worth is assigned to the parts of one’s world ; the 
power of choice; these, and all men’s psychical powers are developed 
in society, and so their genesis must be studied in society. 

Finally, the study of fundamental principles and the study of 
norms and ideals, has much to gain from a study of the social mind. 
Sociology and Experience presupposes some a -priori conceptions or 
Logic and principles, and without fhese it is entirely impossible to 

Etbics. understand it. While it is true that these principles 

which underlie experience, are not developed in experience, it is no 
less true that the knowledge of them has been acquired gradually ; 
this process is to be studied in the history of the social mind. The 
existence of such a thing as universally valid experience, and of 
universal principles which underlie this experience, is perhaps the 


THE SOCIAL MIND. 


91 


clearest evidence of the function of the social mind. A fact is true 
when it commends itself not merely to one, but to every mind 
which has the same evidence before it, and the same power of 
judging. Truth means that the social mind, at a certain stage of 
development, accepts some ideas and beliefs as absolutely valid ; the 
principles underlying experience work in and through the social 
mind, and truth is the stamp of agreement with these principles 
which is set on facts by the social mind. 

It is equally true that norms and ideals exist in the social mind, 
and work through it. These do not yet have universal validity, 
but, we say, they ought to be universally true. Duty is imposed by 
the social mind ; an action is right, and is required, when the social 
mind sets on it the stamp of agreement with the norms and ideals 
which characterise this phase of society. To say that a truth comes 
from the social mind, is not to condemn it but to give the immediate 
exjjlanation of it. 

Further example is unnecessary to show that the sciences dealing 
with man are concerned fundamentally with the social mind. The 
partial neglect of this fact, in certain periods, has led to the false 
statement of problems, and false methods of investigation. 


CHAPTER V. 


CAUSES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


Social groups, as has already been shown, are properly 
functional in character, i.e., the groups are distinct from 
SociaiGroups other, and have an existence of their own, 
depend on because the members of them have formed the 
Social habit of acting together. Accordingly, it is 
Activities, necessary to study the different modes of 
social activity, and the causes of this activity, before it 
is possible to understand the true character of the social 
groups thus formed. Those writers who have recognised 
this dynamic character of society have generally discussed 
the topics of the present chapter under the title “social 
forces,” and in choosing a different term I may properly 
point out the misconception which I believe is involved 
in the use of the former one. 

Social force properly denotes the energy of a social 
group. This force is essentially the same, and is to be 
determined in the same way, for each of the 
different kinds of social groups. A political 
group is strong to contend with other groups, 
political or economic or moral, when the ele¬ 
ments which compose it are strong, and when 
these different elements can work harmoniously together. 
The energy of an economic corporation, or of a school of 
thought in the intellectual world, is to be determined in 
the same manner. In other words, the force or energy 
of a social group is something wholly independent of the 
kind of group; and while the study of the force of social 


Social Force 
versus 
Stimuli to 
Social 
Activity. 


92 


CAUSES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY, 


93 


bodies is very important, it sheds no light on the real 
nature of the different kinds of social groups, or on the 
structure of the society which they form. Social forces 
do not exist, but only social force, and the study of this 
force belongs to the study of the general composition of 
a social group. Finally, social force is to be predicated 


the Social 
Activities. 


of the group as a whole; social stimuli act upon indi¬ 
viduals, and may be called social only because they lead 
to social activity. 

All social activity may be traced back to motives felt 
by the individual; and the character of the activity, as 
Needs of the intensity, is determined by the 

Individual Stimulus from which it springs. While social 
stimulate force is purely quantitative, the stimuli to 
social activity are first of all qualitative, and 
are distinguished by their different qualities. 
Inasmuch as all social activity finds its starting-point and 
stimulus in the individual, the present chapter will be a 
study of man’s desires and emotions as social stimuli. 
The life of society is so bound up with the life of the 
units which compose it, that a study of the individual’s 
motives to action leads directly to the different forms of 
activity which characterise society. 

In general, the stimuli to social activity may be classi¬ 
fied as original and derived. The first class includes 
Classification those needs and emotions which are practically 
of Social universal, and which do not depend on a de- 
stimuh. veloped state of society for their existence. 

The derived stimuli include such needs and emotions as 
imply a somewhat advanced state of society, and only 
arise in the course of social development. The first class 
will include {a) the need of food and clothing, which 
gives rise to the sensations of hunger and of cold, (&) 
the need of protection against one’s fellow-men, v/hich 
occasions the feeling of fear; and (c) the need of com¬ 
panionship, and the emotions associated with the relation 
of individual men. The activity due to these stimuli 


94 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


will vary exceedingly in the course of social development, 
but these needs of men remain the basis of all life in 
society. The second class may be called derived stimuli, 
for social life itself develops new desires, and these in 
turn lead to higher forms of social activity. Under this 
head may he included aesthetic desires, intellectual 
needs, the need of moral approval, and, finally, the need 
‘of religious communion. 


The need of food is the original spur to social activity, 
and the last to lose its force. It was undoubtedly true 

. , of early man, as it is true of wolves and vul- 

A1. Need of i 

Food as a tures, that they joined in the pursuit of food 

Stimulus whenever the greater results thus obtained 
to Social compensated for the difficulty of getting along 
Activity. together. Eoots may be grubbed up and 
fruits gathered in their season by scattered individuals, 
but there are few animals which man could capture 
unarmed and alone. Tools can only be evolved and 
transmitted in society, and every permanent gain in the 
battle for sustenance must have been due to combined 
activity. The domestication of animals and the culti¬ 
vation of grains was possible only when man had learned 
to depend on his neighbour for constant aid as well as 
for protection. The need of food in constant supply and 
in sufficient variety has always led to associated actmty, 
for it could only be satisfied by such associated activity. 
The same need has always continued to be a factor in 
social progress, because the more highly developed society 
is, the better it is able to meet the economic needs of its 
members. 

The need of protection against cold and wet is hardly 
less important than the need of food, in its effect on social 
Need of activity and on social progress. The common 
Protection form of clothing among the more primitive 
against Cold tribes is the skin of an animal, and in order 
and Wet. obtain it, several individuals have joined 

in the hunt. The rude cloth, which in many places 


CAUSES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


95 


succeeded fur as a garment, was both a social invention 
and a social product. Again, men come to need a dwell¬ 
ing, though caves and trees may serve the purpose for a 
while. The form of this dwelling is gradually perfected 
in society, and transmitted in social tradition. Generally 
the dwelling is put up by the group, requiring associated 
activity to produce it. Moreover the house is not in¬ 
habited by one man alone, but by a family or a group 
of families. Thus the need of protection against cold 
and wet tends to bring a group into closer and closer 
relations, until these units have sufficient solidarity to 
become factors in some permanent larger group. The 
dwelling has also an important influence on the character 
of the social group, in that it is the beginning of privacy. 
Neither virtue nor the individuality which virtue implies 
is possible when men live together without means of 
seclusion. This means of seclusion the dwelling may 
furnish, so that it may fittingly be called the beginning 
of civilisation. 

Man is the only animal so far as known which uses 
fire. Tire is important in satisfying both man’s need of 
suitable food and his need of protection 
SocLiiser against cold. In this latter capacity it serves 
the same purpose as the dwelling-house in 
bringing men together, and teaching them to enjoy each 
others society. Its warmth is genial, in that it renders 
those who gather about it genial toward each other and 
fond of each other’s society. Tor every age the hearth is 
the symbol of the home. Somewhat difficult to obtain 
and to preserve, fire is distinctly a social possession, and 
those who would enjoy it must remain members of 
society. 

AYith the beginning of a proper economic activity, the 
need of food and of protection against cold.^-and wet 
became even more potent factors in producing an active 
social life. This economic activity generally began 
with the introduction of slavery. Warriors preserved 


96 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 

their captives when they produced more food than they 
Need of food bones. The economic needs 

and clothing which formerly had been satisfied by labour or 
as Economic Py plunder, now led to the introduction of that 
stimuli. great institution which has been the starting- 
point of human culture.^ When once slavery became 
general, masters had the possibility of leisure for other 
forms of activity, and the complex fabric of truly human 
society began to arise. The same needs which led to the 
introduction of slavery contributed to sustain it. The 
master provided his slaves with food and clotliing, they 
gathered about his hearth as members of his household, 
he possessed the fire where they found protection against 
the cold. Thus the patriarchal household was secure and 
stable because in its life master and slave alike found 
these fundamental needs satisfied. 

In the whole course of industrial progress these original 
needs of man have remained the strongest and most 
These Needs universally potent, and to-day they are still 
the Basis of fundamental. In regions naturally barren, or 
Society. where social conditions have made it difficult 
to secure sustenance, the higher forms of society have 
never prospered. Only when men are fed and warmed 
have they any leisure or interest for higher social activi¬ 
ties. And those who deal with the degenerate classes 
learn to appreciate the force of these needs as spurs to 
progress. The most hopeless cases are those which prac¬ 
tically have no standard of living and are ready to 
accept whatever fortune brings. The first work of the 
man who Would help such cases is to make them feel 
new needs, to make them dissatisfied with having nothing, 
that, in the effort for something, the habit of effort may 
be formed. 

Upon these fundamental stimuli depends the whole 
industrial fabric. They are as potent to rouse men to 
activity when each individual performs some slight part 

^ Article “ Slavery,” in Encydopocdia Britannica. 


CAUSES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


97 


in preparing goods for the world-market, as when a 
These Needs provides the food of a savage for Inin¬ 

as stimuli to self and his family. Stupendous economic in- 
developed stitutions have been called into being, the whole 
Activity. world has become one vast society for the 
production and interchange of goods, and the 
stimuli which have given rise to the whole and still keep 
it in motion are these simple needs of man’s physical 
nature. The economic structure is as universal as these 
needs—practically no one can separate himself from it 
and live. And it will appear later that this structure is 
the basis of the higher forms of social life. Political life 
and the state have arisen in the effort to defend property 
as well as life. The economic struggle for existence has 
become fairly an intellectual struggle, and mind is de¬ 
veloped in the effort to maintain a position in the 
economic world. Moral rules and aesthetic ideals are 
not independent of economic life, but are rather its off¬ 
spring. 

Thus with the development of society the power of 
these needs becomes greater, the activity occasioned by 

^ them grows more varied, and the range of this 
Wider Range . ^ ^ , 

of Activity activity is increased. The savage eats when 

stimulated he has game, and takes no thought of another 

by these ^ in the future; hunger comes over him, 

Needs. jo j 

and once more he feels an impulse stimulating 

him to activity. The civilised man feels the constant 
power of these stimuli, and all his life is governed with 
reference to the satisfaction of these needs as they recur. 
And with complex society these needs are no longer 
satisfied by what will merely sustain life and protect the 
body from extremes of temperature. Society has created 
a higher “standard of living” as it is called, and that 
determines the food and the clothing that are needed. 
The number of courses absolutely necessary for dinner 
depends on rank in society; fashion decides what clothing 
is required; the dwelling-house is not for protection but 
H 


98 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


for “ comfort.” Under the altered conditions the activity 
stimulated by these needs changes its entire character. 
In order to supply the new needs more activity is neces¬ 
sary, and activity in a far greater and more complex 
social organisation. They can only be satisfied in a stable 
organisation, so that as they become, more complex men 
hesitate more and more before lending countenance to 
schemes subversive of the existing social order. Finally, 
the ideals associated with the “ standard of living ” have 
an important influence in shaping other forms of social 
activity than the economic. 

The second original social stimulus is the need of 

protection against one’s fellow beings. In all stages of 

society, but particularly in the lower, hostile 

2 . Need of jj^fluences surround man. An animal must 
Protection 

against have some means of defence, either strength 
Fellow-men to fight or speed to run away. Man lives in 

as a Social jjianv quarters of the globe where neither his 
Stimulus. IT-. .T P T • 

speed nor his strength ot arm can protect him 

from his foes. lie must rely on some higher means of 
defence or perish; and it is only as men fight in groups, 
and with the reason that is developed and transmitted 
by mutual intercourse, that they can hope to subdue to 
themselves the beasts of the field. But the worst foe of 
man is man himself. Under peculiar circumstances, 
some savage races have lived in such small and fluid 
groups that, on the whole, they have succeeded in avoid¬ 
ing each other. Ordinarily this is impossible, and man 
has found protection from his fellows by uniting with 
his fellows. We find the same process as in the for¬ 
mation of physical units; the component parts form 
temporary and ever-changing alliances in their ceaseless 
competitions with each other. For man protection means 
defensive strength; and the need of this leads to union, 
to the beginnings of a common life that may become 
political. Such groups, with strength to defend the 
individual, are a necessity, and expulsion from the tribe 


U »f 0. 


CAUSES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY, 


99 


may amount to a sentence of death. This need of 
protection manifests itself in the emotional life as fear, 
and the fear of hostility has come to have, as a part of its 
very being, the instinct for union, so that nothing is so 
potent as fear to kindle delight in the presence of 
others. Many savage tribes only unite in the presence 
of a common danger, and fear is always a potent force 
in developing functional bonds of union. 

The degree of strength (defensive or offensive) which 
a tribe is likely to attain, is in large measure determined 

by the demands made on it. The phrase. 
This Need ^ 

Varies with balance of power,” has scarcely any meaning 

the Position in the politics of savage tribes; to find a place 
of the among strong tribes, a tribe must itself be 
or^Trih^^^ strong, else it cannot preserve its indepen¬ 
dence. Nor is a tribe likely to develop great 
strength among weak neighbours; where pressure from 
outside is lacking, an empire may break up through the 
very repulsion of its parts, so soon as the military power 
which constructed it grows weak. Thus the form in 
which this need of protection is met, is determined by 
natural selection. Strength is developed according to 
the need, and the tribe that fails to develop it goes to 
the wall. 

The rude political body thus formed as a protection 
for life, is a most important social unit. It is the germ 
The Early of tbe State, and under the protection of its 
state meets growing power we may expect to find the 
this Need, beginnings of true economic life, and the more 
rapid advancement of social and psychical life. In this 
group the individual finds, in the first place, protection 
from outside, a little world in which ordinarily he can 
live at peace; and such peace is the first condition of 
progress. Secondly, he is obliged to cultivate a 'modus 
vivendi with his fellows who are members of the same 
little world. Here we find the beginnings of property; 
men agree to respect certain possessions of their neigh- 


lOO 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


Lours. Here also are to be found the beginnings of law 
and rights, and perhaps the beginnings of ethics. 

With the development of society, the function of 
protection becomes even more important than at first, 
Need of higher stages of culture depend abso- 

Protection in lately upon such a shelter from outside attack 
Developed as is afforded by the state. A higher civilisa- 
Civilisation. much more at stake, as it rises 

from lower stages, that those who prize it will sacrifice 
correspondingly more to shelter it. Undoubtedly the 
cost of government is excessively great to-day, but 
comparatively few murmurs are heard against this. 
The debt of civilisation to the state takes form in the 
sentiment of patriotism, which is gradually developed 
as the strongest support of the state, and we only know 
the strength of this sentirnent when some danger im¬ 
pends. 

At the same time the state continues to protect a 
man from his neighbours, for it is this need of protection 
Greater which keeps in motion the whole apparatus of 
need of law, both legislative and judiciary. Here the 
Protection stimulus has increased both in range and in 
Ttate^ intensity. It is stronger to-day, for more is at 

stake. In primitive society it is a day’s work 
only that may be stolen; while now the accumulations 
of generations are to be protected by law. Its range is 
largely increased. The chief of a primitive tribe only 
gives advice which may aid in the settlement of disputes, 
and a man has hardly any rights which his neighbour is 
bound to respect. The individual’s rights, with the 
liberties and the duties which they imply, are even 
to-day increasing rapidly in the highest civilisations 
we know; and there is a corresponding increase in what 
society may undertake in securing to the individual his 
rights. Apart from all question as to the proper fields of 
state activity, the functions of the police and of the 
courts in the mere exercise of protection are many-fold 


CAUSES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


lOI 


greater than they were two or three centuries ago in 
civilised Europed The whole range of political activity 
goes back for its fundamental stimulus to the simple need 
of protection. 

This is not the place to trace in detail the emotions 
which at all times have determined man’s attitude toward 
3 . Emotions fellows. But while these emotions have 
as Causes not resulted in definite social institutions, 
of Social their influence has been felt as an aid or a 
Activity. hindrance in all forms of activity, and in the 
development of all kinds of institutions. From the stand¬ 
point of sociological investigation, they may naturally be 
divided into two classes: the self-regarding, such as envy 
and anger; and those which centre on others—sympathy, 
friendship, and love. 

The conditions of primitive society favoured the de¬ 
velopment of self-regarding emotions, and did not supply 
(o) Self- checks which in later times have restrained 

regarding their operation. Egoism is a universal attri- 
Emotions in bate among savage races, and in many 

Primitive countries the strained effort to procure suste- 
Society. 

nance does not permit man to forget himself. 
Anger, not being subject to the restraints of later times, 
seems to be only destructive of justice; but anger 
becomes revenge, and, historically, revenge is the strong 
tap-root of what is to become justice. Envy and rivalry 
generally seem to be destructive of the slow-growing 
habits of civilisation. Envy of another’s prosperity is 
a motive to slay him, until the prosperous man comes to 
fear even the envy of the gods. Eivalry between two 
tribes has often prolonged their feuds until both were 
crippled. And yet the activity produced by these stimuli 
has frequently been the very thing necessary lor progress ; 
for unless this or some other equally potent force had 
roused men from the inertia of the savage, and had 
broken the habit which had become a barrier to progress, 
^ Leroy-Beaulieu, The Modern State, Bk. III. ch. ii. 


102 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


a tribe would have fallen a victim to the very progress 
it had made in the past. 

As civilisation has advanced, the destructive effects of 
anger and revenge have been in a measure controlled. 

Justice is supposed to have passed beyond the 
regarding stage of vigilance committees and lynching. 
Emotions in None the less, the arm of justice still depends 
Sodety^^^ on a righteous anger to stimulate its action, 
and it is only the coward who does not resent 
an insult. To-day rivalry and ambition are forces mighty 
to determine the lives of men and the course of society. 
Business life and political life are ruled by the desire to 
succeed; scholars and artists pursue knowledge and art 
for their own personal ends; and too often the highest 
forms of activity are marred by most petty jealousies. 
So the love of acquisition, vanity and the love of display, 
the love of praise, the whole list of self-regarding 
emotions, are stimuli to social activity; and the current 
of social life is directed by the feelings of individuals. 

It is unnecessary to dwell on the importance of 
sympathy and the love of companionship as stimuli to 
(6). (xeneral Social activity. In their lowest form they are 
sympathetic manifested as sympathetic fear and sym- 
Emotions. pathetic pleasure; a group of men share the 
fear of one, or the glad state of one is infectious and 
determines the mood of all. The faculty of imitation is 
related to this form of sympathy; we all have a tendency 
to act out what we think and what we see others doing, 
so that modes of action as well as feelings tend to spread 
through the group. Important as this instinctive sym¬ 
pathy is in uniting the primitive group and rendering it 
homogeneous, it is very far from tlie distinctly human 
love of companionship. The higher forms of friendship 
depend on personality, and personality is developed in 
society. The lower love of companionship manifests 
itself to-day in the club, and in many of the forms of 
activity known as “ polite society.” Friendship and love 


CAUSES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


103 

are higher developments of this emotion, and unite 
smaller groups in a closer, more permanent, union. 

Besides these general sympathetic emotions there are 
others, more or less closely associated with the sexual 
(c). Sym- instinct, which have as their object particular 
pathetic individuals. This class of emotions is by far 
dim\^ed* the most direct stimulus to social activity, for 
towards results in the family. The extent of the 

particular social group thus formed varies widely, and its 
Individuals, character changes with its extent. It may 
consist of but two, who find special delight in each other’s 
society. Among animals, as well as among men, it in¬ 
cludes also the offspring, for the young must be protected 
and fed. Finally the family clan may include all who 
believe they are descended from common parentage. 
The clan based on blood-relationship has quite generally 
preceded the tribe as the conserver of culture and the 
administrator of justice, so that the tie of blood has 
opened the way for various and most important social 
activities. 

The emotions connected with the sexual instincts are 
but the starting-point for the unity of the family, for the 

, individuals who are thus brought together 
Broad reach . • ^ 

of Emotions enter into new and broader relations, ihe 
developed in family proper constitutes a unit in which the 
Family Life, members perform different functions 

for the good of the whole. The “parental instinct,” 
fostered by dependent children, increases indefinitely the 
power of the stimuli to economic and political activity 
already considered. The new relations of the family are 
the most powerful stimulus impelling man to look beyond 
the present and to provide for emergencies in the future; 
and they are also a stimulus impelling him to look above 
the present. The family develojis the habit of provi¬ 
dence and the habit of progress. In every stage of social 
development family interests are the strongest stimulus 
to activity for the good of others. Brother is ready to 


104 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY 


die for brother, or the mother for her child, long before 
duties to a man as a man are recognised. Nor is there 
ever any stronger motive to the sacrifice of self for 
another than the love that is developed in the family. 
As civilisation advances, family life gains in power as a 
stimulus to social activities. Everything pure and noble 
centres in the home, and the relations of the family are 
the truest stimulus to the higher forms of activity, the 
intellectual, the moral, and the religious, activities. 

The non-essential or derived stimuli to social activity 

differ from those already discussed in that they are not so 

B. universal, and that their power seems to be 

Non-essential in large measure to ’civilisation itself, 
or derived -to ip • . • 

Social ’ They exist only for men and for societies 

stimuli. which have developed the faculty of reason. 

In a highly developed state of society they may far 

exceed the lower stimuli in power, and even become the 

basis of society. 

The aesthetic desires of man, his love of the beautiful 
which is satisfied only by the perception of beautiful 
, , things, are important stimuli to social activity, 

the Beautiful sense ot the beautiiul is developed in 
leads to society, and remains a social possession. The 

Social desire to express ideals in forms of sense, and 
Activity. / -p 1 1 • 

to make beautiiul objects, leads to much 

social activity. The creation of ideals requires a know¬ 
ledge of the deepest problems of life, and obliges 
the artist to be in a large sense a social man. He must 
be in touch with life, or his work will not be living. 
While the stimulus comes from the deep appreciation of 
truth, the form in which the ideal is seen and in which it 
may be expressed, is no private possession. The artist 
must find artist companions; the effort to create what is 
beautiful leads to peculiar types of social activity and of 
social classes. 

The power to appreciate beautiful objects is also a 
social possession, and stimulates social activity. Beautiful 


CAUSES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


105 


Love of the 
Beautiful 
affects the 
Ordinary 
Needs of 
Man. 


paintings and the products of plastic art cannot be‘fully 
known except by those who go over the civilised world to 
see them face to face. Yet to-day the dissemination of 
accurate reproductions has become a very important 
industry in itself. The drama is written for an audience 
to share. Music shows its real power when it makes a 
thousand hearers as one man, and takes full possession of 
this soul. A share in the same ideals, whatever be the 
form of their expression, produces new intimacies among 
individuals, and new social groups are directly formed as 
the result. 

The reaction of this love of the beautiful on the 
stimuli already considered cannot be overlooked. These 
desires presuppose the satisfaction of the lower 
needs before they have a real opportunity 
to assert their power. Accordingly, the 
cultivation of these higher needs is the most 
vital stimulus to satisfy lower needs, and, as 
it were, to set them aside. Two results have 
been noted from the attempt to introduce art education 
among the lower classes in England.^ In the first 
place, even moderate success has resulted in a most 
powerful stimulus to shake off habits of poverty and 
inertia. Men who could make time for the satisfaction 
of higher needs, received just the necessary encourage¬ 
ment to do this. And, secondly, the recognition of the 
ideal in forms of sense has at times, even as Plato 
suggests, opened men’s eyes for the higher truth in some 
of its other forms. Any genuine love of the beautiful 
modifies the whole of life. 

Men’s intellectual needs are no small factor 
in determining the character and intensity of 
social life. The strength of these needs is 
shown by the institutions for the propaga¬ 
tion of truth, by institutions for investiga¬ 
tion, and by the intellectual intercourse to which 
1 V. Bosanquet. Essays and Addresses, London, 1891, pp. 25 sqq^. 


2 . Intellec 
tual Needs 
lead to 
Social 
Activity. 


io6 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


they ■ give rise. The first class of institutions include 
the school, the platform, and the press. They exist 
simply to satisfy man’s need of truth, and of a mind 
developed to know the truth. We believe that the child 
should start in life with a certain mental equipment; 
and the needs thus developed are a constant stimulus 
to intellectual intercourse, else they would be hardly 
worth developing. The second class of institutions 
express this need in a yet stronger form. The scholar 
studies for himself, because the spirit witliin him can 
only be satisfied by a constantly enlarging view of truth. 
And he studies for society; the intellectual world awaits 
the communication of his discoveries. Every advance 
in literature or in science widens man’s interests, and 
strengthens his need of truth. Society, in both the 
lower and higher forms of its activity, is profoundly 
affected by this stimulus. 

It is unnecessary to treat in detail the need of moral 
approval and the need of moral association, or the need 
of religious communion, as stimuli to social 
activity. In some finely constituted minds 
the sense of right and duty seems to be the 
only spring of activity. Apparently they can 
dispense with the stimulus due to any lower 
need, and even with the support to be drawn 
from communion with a higher power. The friendship 
based on love for the same moral ideals is one of the 
highest, purest, forms of friendship. The power of moral 
ideals to stimulate and control social life, is shown almost 
as clearly in the lower as in the higher stages of society. 
So man’s need of religious communion with God, and 
religious association with his fellows, has always brought 
men together in common worship of God. The power of 
this motive is evident only when all the influence of 
culture and all the authority of the state have been 
exerted to prevent its normal expression in religious 
activity. But when it is allowed to develop in normal 


3. Moral 
and 

Religious 
Needs Lead 
to Social 
Activity. 


CAUSES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY, 


107 


religious life, the institutions to which it gives rise and 
their influence on every side of social life, are a con¬ 
stant evidence of its social importance. Like the moral 
ideal, but with a more personal appeal, the religious 
need claims the right to absorb all the others and to 
stamp its impress on them. It so governs and con¬ 
trols the whole of life, that the history of religion 
may almost claim to be the history of society. 

To these various stimuli affecting the individuals who 
compose society, is due the life and activity of society. 
Conclusion things are clear as the result of this 

discussion. First, the life of society centres 
in individuals; and these two factors, society and indi¬ 
viduals, can only be understood by studying them as 
interacting factors. Secondly, the different forms of 
social activity, and the different social aggregates arising 
in each form, should be classified according to the simple 
stimuli to which each form of activity is due. 


CHAPTEE YL 


THE MODES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 

The student desiring to understand the complex life of 
society and the lines of its development, finds himself 
Variety of difficulty at the outset, because of the con- 
Social fused variety of phenomena that present 
Phenomena, themselves to him. The first work of the 
new science of society, the classification of social phe¬ 
nomena, has not yet been done with any success. Earlier 
writers spoke of family, church, and state as the funda¬ 
mental social units; for Comte, the individual, the family, 
and “ society ” are the social organs; and Spencer w^ould 
classify social activities and institutions according to the 
three “systems” of organs found in the higher animals. 
Frequently these classifications have involved the logical 
error of division according to more than one principle; 
but, apart from logical blunders, students of society have 
conspicuously failed to agree on any one classification, 
and this failure (to agree on some common foundation) 
has proved almost fatal to any real progress in the 
science. 

The scientific value of a true classification lies not so 
much in its convenience, or in its function as the basis of 
The Genetic ^1^7 successful union among students—im- 
Principle of portant though these undoubtedly are—as in 
Classification, fact that it represents in itself the funda¬ 
mental relations of the phenomena under consideration. 
Almost any sort of classification serves the former pur- 

108 


THE MODES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


109 


pose to some extent, but the theory of evolution has 
wrought a great change in the logic of natural science, by 
demonstrating that there is one really natural method of 
classification. If organisms of different species have 
sprung from one common stock, the genetic relation 
between them, wherever it can be discovered, determines 
the true, the natural classification. The evolution of 
social activities and social institutions bears a consider¬ 
able resemblance to the evolution of organisms; and if 
complex social phenomena can be traced back to a few 
simple sources, it will give the key to the genetic classifi¬ 
cation which a natural science seeks.^ 

In the last chapter it was shown that man’s needs and 
emotions were the causes of social activity, and that these 
The Classifi- ^0 social life were comparatively simple 

cation of and easily classified. Following this clue, we 
Social can give without hesitation the classification 

Phenomena. social activities according to the stimuli 
from which they spring, in the following four groups: 
(1) Economic, (2) “Social” (including domestic), (3) 
Political (and legal), (4) Psychical. Social groups arise 
in the performance of definite social activities, and the 
most important bond of union consists of their common 
function (chap, iii.), consequently the principle for the 
classification of social activities is at the same time the 
principle for the classification of social groups. And 
social institutions, as I hope to show in the present and 
the following chapters, are in reality habits of some phase 
of social activity; their influence extends far beyond the 
activities in which they arise, but they are classified 
according to the same principle as the forms of social 
activity. Finally, the complex forms of social activity 
can more easily be reduced to the simple forms from 
which they are derived, when the student is guided by 

^ I have discussed the question of the classification of social phenomena 
more fully in an article in the Bibliotheca Hacra for January, 1896. 


lO 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


the principle that has been stated. In this way we can 
hope to reach a classification of social phenomena that is 
final (for the present state of our knowledge), a classifi¬ 
cation that will prove the basis for common study of 
social life and the starting-point for a more complete 
understanding of social life. 

The fundamental mode of social activity is the economic 
or industrial. The need of food, which man shares with 
I The animal; the need of protection against 

Economic cold and wet, on which life itself depends ; 
Mode of and all the various modifications of these 
Social simple needs, which were considered in the 
Activity. preceding chapter, are the sources of this 
activity. It is as universal as are the simple needs of 
human nature, though its influence on other forms of 
social life is no doubt very different in crabbed northern 
climates from what it is in prolific lands near the equator. 
In the lowest forms of society which we can conceive— 
if indeed we can call it society—these needs cannot lead 
to any definite and lasting social activity. They are 
indeed present in full power; but each individual or 
social group satisfies them as best it may; one eats the 
food he gets, and wears the skins he has prepared, but 
the economic form of social life hardly exists as yet. 
There is no value, for exchange has not begun; no wealth, 
for each individual or clan simply satisfies its own needs 
without coming into comparison with anyone else; true 
social life, really human life, exists only in germ. 

When circulation intervenes between the production of 
what satisfies want, and its immediate consumption, it is 
The Rise of possible to Speak of a true economic activity 
Economic of Society. The simple bond of exchange 
Activity. unites men, at first rarely and for a brief 
moment, then more regularly and more permanently, in a 
common activity for the satisfaction of economic needs. 
The stimulus still acts on individuals, but it leads them to 
work together, till all that each one does must be con- 


THE MODES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


II 


sidered from the social standpoint as part of the in¬ 
dustrial activity of society. The needs are still universal, 
and the resulting social activity embraces the whole of 
society. No one escapes from it, for no one is free from 
the need of food and clothing; no one can really isolate 
himself from the social activity that meets these needs, 
for the industrial activity of society is modified by the 
attitude of each individual toward it. The social activity 
resulting from economic needs, then, is coextensive with 
society, and every individual has his place in the economic 
or industrial life of society. 

The economic mode of social activity develops simul¬ 
taneously in three phases, which are commonly known as 
Three phases production, circulation, and consumption. The 
of Economic special science dealing with economic phe- 
Activity. nomena naturally considers these phases in the 
above order. It studies the production of goods, and traces 
them from their economic origin to their economic end. 

The science of society is concerned not with goods 
but with persons, so that it treats the subject in a 
different order. In the history of culture wealth begins 
with exchange, not with production; it is the circulation 
of commodities which first unites individuals or groups in 
a common activity that deserves the name economic. 
Tor sociology circulation is the fundamental fact; con¬ 
sumption, or the working of the economic motives, the 
second fact to be considered; chronologically as well as 
logically, production is to be considered last. 

Circulation is based on the fact that men are different; 
different in their nature and capacities, and different in 
(o). Circula- their surroundings. The needs of any one are 
tion. most easily met when several unite, each to 

supply what he is best able, to this end. Historically the 
supply of such a mineral as salt, or the possession of a 
good fishing-ground, or some other abundant source of 
food, commonly furnished the motive to meet the want 
of other things by exchange. So soon as society was 


II2 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


Stable enough to permit the development of farther 
differences in skill, the range of exchange was much 
widened. Exchange, the circulation of goods, is the 
fundamental form of economic activity. It determines 
the limits of an economic society, and the structure of 
a larger economic group is mainly due to this phase 
of its common activity. 

The second phase of economic activity is ordinarily 
called “consumption.” The “consumption of goods” 
(6). Con- means for the economist the obtaining of 
sumption. goods from a market, and the devoting of 
them to the satisfaction of the want or desire which they 
were intended to satisfy. The importance of this branch 
of economics to the sociologist is due to the fact that 
here is the point where the economic stimuli find their 
application in producing economic activity. Economically 
it is the “ desire to consume ” that leads men to exchange 
what they possess, to produce for the purpose of exchange, 
and thus to obtain what they need. The study of the 
needs men feel, and the degree to which they feel them, 
is the direct key to an understanding of the particular 
forms of economic activity. 

Thirdly, economic activity is to be studied from the 
standpoint of production. Production for a market is 
(c). Produc- the direct result of the utility of exchange; 
tion. men undertake to meet a market demand 

when that is the surest way of meeting their own needs. 
The possibility of the development of exchange, and of 
economic consumption, lies just here; as production for a 
market develops and controls industrial life, circulation 
increases its range, and economic solidarity results from 
the increasing dependence of each individual on the 
Society in which he lives his industrial life. The pro¬ 
duction of the goods men use is so much more of an 
affair than the exchange of goods or their consumption, 
that naturally the organisation of society for production, 
the so-called industrial organisation in the stricter sense 


THE MODES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


1 13 

of the term, sets its mark on all economic activity, and 
indeed on all the life of society. 

The three phases of economic activity must be con¬ 
sidered in another chapter more in detail, in order to 
Economic understand their development and their social 
Activity, importance.* At this point I desire to empha- 
Groups, gig0 economic stimuli cause an 

economic activity of society, embracing all of 
society because the needs in question exist for every 
individual. Economic activity appears in three phases, 
and in each phase particular groups are formed to per¬ 
form particular functions—in each phase special institu¬ 
tions arise to meet special ends. The economic group 
like other social groups, is to be understood only from the 
standpoint of its function in the universal economic life 
of a society. The economic institution is in reality a 
habit of economic activity, and it accomplishes even more 
in facilitating and extending this activity than do the 
habits of the individual man, out of which grows his 
entire power to accomplish the ends he sets before him. 

The economic life of society proceeds from a few 
definite sources, and continues to depend on springs of 
Economic activity that are not difficult to analyse; it 
Activity and can be studied by itself, as is proved by the 
other forms existence of a science of economics. And yet 
of Social Life. does not exist by itself; it is so closely 
interlinked with the “social” and domestic organisation 
of society, that neither the “social” nor the economic 
organisation of society can be truly explained when they 
are studied alone. Political influences favour or hinder 
economic development; the state rests back on the 
industrial life that a people has developed. Psychical 
life arises as an offshoot of the common life by which 
man’s simplest needs are met, and at length supplies new 
motive and wiser direction to economic activity. In a 
word, economic activity springs from definite motives, 
and so it may be studied by itself; but these motives are 
I 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


114 


so interlaced with a variety of other motives in the man 
himself, that no one form of the activity in which he 
engages can be said to exist independently or can be 
understood independently. 

The second general standpoint from which the activity 
of society may be studied, deserves the name social in a 
II The special.sense. All of society, as we have seen, 
“Social’’ falls into economic classes and has an econo- 
Activity of pf0. similarly all of society falls into social 
Society. classes, classes for closer social intercourse, 
and such intercourse constitutes its distinctly social life. 
This social life also has its own peculiar stimuli, namely, 
the emotions and interests which draw a man to one 
neighbour, and repel him from another. The domestic 
life which results from these emotions, together with 
the emotions associated with the sexual and the parental 
instinct, is but one form of the general social life of 
the community. In fact, the family life is not directly 
included in what is known as “society,” for in the close 
union of home life, members of the family easily lose that 
peculiar stimulus which comes from the contact of minds 
that contribute something new and fresh to each other in 
conversation. In broader social intercourse the mind is 
forcibly lifted out of common ruts, and quickened by 
new ideas and new points of view; the desire for this 
new life gives rise to the distinctly social activity of 
society, and in this activity social groups are formed and 
social institutions arise. 

While there is usually some likeness to begin with 
among those who join in social intercourse, their associ- 
The charac- result in a growing assimila- 

ter of the tion. The social group is a nursery of common 
“ Social ” habits, and it is these habits or customs which 
distinguish the group with increasing clearness 
from other allied groups. The common customs consti¬ 
tute the character* of the group; they may become the 
key of admission, since those who have the habits which 


THE MODES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 115 

distinguish a particular class are easily received into the 
common -activity of that class. Herein lies the value of 
rules of etiquette and ceremonial forms, for unless such 
forms facilitate social intercourse and bind men together 
in social classes, they are worse than useless. A more 
important characteristic of these social groups is the social 
ideals, ideals of politeness, of accessibility, liberality, and 
respect for others, which are developed in this social 
intercourse. Of these social groups the family is the 
only one which has become really definite and fixed, and 
to the discussion of this it is necessary to devote a follow¬ 
ing chapter. The social club, and all the associations 
and “societies” of the present day, utilise the social 
desires, but frequently their main end is not distinctly 
social. The classes in what is generally known as society, 
or polite society, are the real groups for “ social ” life; 
and the “ social scale ” is one name for the social structure 
of a community. 

The customs and conventions which mark the social 
group may be described as habits of activity in the social 
^ organism. They are a social fact, though their 

Fundamental of application is the individual. The 

Type of all rise and fall of custom, and the authority of 
Social ^ custom, constitute the most important question 
Authority. social evolution; it concerns the very nature 
of the group which becomes the proper unit of society. 
In developed society the line is not always sharply drawn 
between social duties and excellencies on the one hand, 
and moral duties and ideals on the other. Eeligious 
requirements, moral rules, laws enforced by the state, 
and customs enforced by social sanction, have sprung 
from the same root; the differentiation of these require¬ 
ments and their respective sanctions has not been fully 
accomplished even yet. The character of social life, and 
the material or content of custom, is undoubtedly deter¬ 
mined by the degree of civilisation. Social life may, 
perhaps, begin as a mere animal gregariousness; with the 


ii6 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


reign of physical force, a rude political character may 
distinguish social life; where economic interests ^ire fore¬ 
most, social intercourse will bear an industrial stamp; 
the school and the press mean that social intercourse 
has risen to the intellectual plane, and the church, that 
such intercourse may rise to the religious plane. 

The relation of the distinctly social activity of the 
community to its psychical life is clear from the preceding 
Eeiaf 0 of j intellectual, and the moral, and 

“Social” religious life of a community are largely 

Activity specialisations of this social life. Accordingly, 
to other where a genuine social life is vigorous and 
Social Life intense, conditions favour the development of 
the psychical life. In like manner, this social 
activity lies at the basis of political activity. The race, 
i.e., those who regard themselves as related to each other 
by reason of their common language, common customs, 
etc., is a social development; and the nation always tends 
to become coincident with the race. The rules enforced 
by the power of the state are not different in kind; often 
they do not differ in origin from the rules of custom 
which “society” enforces by its own peculiar sanction. 
Social activity is as universal and as fundamental as 
economic activity. Association in industrial pursuits 
both presupposes the faculty of association, and largely 
assists in developing this faculty. Social customs are a 
great bulwark of industry to render the industrial world 
stable; social classes and industrial classes so far corres¬ 
pond, that the two relations work together in harmony to 
produce a fuller and richer common life within the group. 

The third form of social activity, according to the 
above classification, is the political. The stimulus to 
III. Political which this form of activity is due, is the need 
Activity of of protection, and the fear of hostile powers. 
Society. stimulus has assumed a double form. 

It includes first the need of protection for the political 
group as a whole, and leads to the organisation of society 


THE MODES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY 


17 


in such wise as to protect the tribe or the state from 
incursion or attack by other political groups. It includes 
also the need of protection within the tribe itself, and 
this leads to the recognition of such individual rights, 
and the development of such restraining laws, as best 
conduce to the unity and strength of the whole body. 
Accordingly, the political activity of society is the con¬ 
stant 'readjustment of the government to new internal 
conditions, and the adjustment of the state’s military 
and diplomatic service to new external conditions. The 
various and complex forms which this activity assumes, 
centre in one all-embracing institution, the state. This 
topic is so important that the discussion of it is deferred 
to a separate chapter; and, inasmuch as political activity 
and political structure really form one question, they will 
be discussed together. At this point, it only remains to 
speak of the relation of the political activity of society to 
the other forms of social activity. 

In a sense, the political life of a society may be 
regarded as the outcome of all the various forms of 
Political Life activity, and the focus in which they 

and other meet. The nation has often seemed the most 
Modes of perfect social unit, and sociology has been 
Social described as a political science, or even as the 
Activity. political science. In time past, the industrial 
market has frequently coincided with the nation; the 
idea of humanity has been limited by the confines of the 
race and the nation, so that social life, and all the higher 
psychical life, were but phases of the people’s national 
life. A state is no longer coincident with society, but 
industry continues to depend on the state for the pro¬ 
tection of those who engage in it; common political 
interests are a powerful factor in the social world; while 
the protection of a strong government is necessary^ for 
the higher developments of psychical life, and the type 
of government always reacts on the character of the 
moral and intellectual life. 


ii8 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


Finally, the activity of society may be studied as a 
psychical activity. The stimuli to which this activity is 
IV Psychical —aesthetic, intellectual, moral, and religious 
Activity of needs—have been described in the preceding 
Society. chapter as the non-essential or derived stimuli. 
1 . Aesthetic, beautiful and the desire to 

enjoy beautiful things produce the aesthetic activity of 
society, the activity which arises in connection with the 
production and the appreciation of beautiful things. It 
gives rise to institutions such as the schools of art, in 
which a master’s habits descend to his pupils and perhaps 
open the way for new creative masters; schools in which 
lovers of beauty are trained to see the beautiful in par¬ 
ticular forms and under particular conditions. These 
institutions are simply habitual ways in wdiich the master 
creates, and his audience appreciates, the expression of 
beauty. They are social habits. 

Similarly, the need of intellectual intercourse, and the 
desire to know the truth, is the stimulus to the intellec- 
2 inteUec- activity of society. This intellectual 

tuai Activity activity follows habitual modes, and thus 
and Institu- gives rise to the institutions for intellectual 
tions. intercourse which were mentioned in the last 
chapter. The platform and the press are such institu¬ 
tions for the spread of truth, while the university is 
intended to be an institution for research. But the 
intellectual activity of society is by no means limited to 
institutions of this sort, for it enters as one element into 
all social intercourse. Indeed, differences in the degree 
and character of intellectual training, are one of the most 
important factors in the differentiation of social classes. 

The sense for beauty and the desire for truth are social 
Truth and f^cts. The truth that has been attained and that 
Beauty as finds expression in science and philosophy, and 
Social ill art, does not belong to any one individual. 
Principles, society. Not only the desire to know the 

truth, but the very power to recognise what is true, is 


THE MODES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 119 

developed in society and is a social possession. A Eaphael 
and a Beethoven perceived the beautiful which their ages 
sought to grasp, and brought it to expression. Bacon and 
Newton and Faraday had that creative genius which could 
formulate the scientific truth to which their respective 
ages were advancing.- The intellect does indeed centre 
in the individual, but individuality itself develops as a 
product of the intellectual activity of society. 

The psychical activity of society includes also the 
moral life which springs from the need of moral approval 
3 . Moral moral association. This moral life ex¬ 

activity and presses itself first in the form of certain rules, 
Moral “In- which have been differentiated from the cus- 
stitutions. mark the social groups. Custom 

is enforced by the group and within the group, as the 
distinguishing characteristic of this body. A custom 
becomes a moral rule when it is regarded as universally 
binding, as necessary to society as a whole, and so en¬ 
forced by society as a whole. The observance of this 
custom is a duty, and anyone who neglects it is con¬ 
demned by society. It goes without saying that this 
transformation of custom into conscious rule is a gradual 
process, in which men of fine sense discern the right 
before their fellows, and can but slowly extend and purify 
the rules of right action. This process is the slowly 
developing moral life of society, and the “ institutions 
which arise in connection with it are known as duties. 
The moral life expresses itself also in moral ideals. 
Ideals are a social fact; the ideals which men create for 
themselves are proposed to them by the social group. 
Noble intellects are trained by society to perceive the 
high ends which give to life its meaning, and through 
them these ideals are developed; they are produced in 
society, as well as a social possession. We can never for¬ 
get that morality centres in the individual and aims to 
.control his life; nor should we forget that morality is a 
form of social life, a habit of ^the social group. 


120 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


Almost universally in human society men have felt the 
need of communion with a God, and this has led to a 
4 Religious ’’eligious activity of society. New rules of 
Activity and right and new ideals (closely associated with 
Institutions moral rules and moral ideals) arise through 
in Society, introduction of a new factor, relation to 

God. The social nature of these rules and ideals is 
evident from the redistributions of society which they 
have always caused. The history of religion discusses the 
institutions of sacrifice and purification, of churches and 
priesthoods, through which this religious activity has 
found expression. These institutions are the particular 
forms assumed by this kind of social activity; they are 
habits wdiich characterise social groups, and give rise to 
social groups. Eeligion centres in the individual, and 
stands for the relation of an individual to his God; but 
the character of this relation is determined by society, 
and preserved in society. Neither religious reformers 
nor students of religious thought have failed to see the 
importance of religious fellowship in arousing and 
developing the individual’s sense of relation to God. 
The religious life finds its normal expression in the 
church and, at least in theory, no social group is so 
closely knit together as is the church in its common love 
and common worship of God; nor does any form of social 
activity claim such a comprehensive authority over all of 
life. Those who reduce the church to the place of a 
voluntary association, fail to see either its religious or its 
social meaning. 

To avoid any misapi^rehension, I may remind the reader of 
tho definition of the science of sociology ; as a science sociology 
studies processes, and explains the manner in which forms of 
psychical life arise in society, but it is not concerned with the 
origin or ultimate meaning of what it explains. So it studies 
religion and explains the manner in which it arises, but it neither 
denies nor affirms the real existence of God. The Christian 
student sees the working of the divine hand, not in religion 
alone, but in all the forms of social activity ; the religious life 


THE MODES OE SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


I2I 


of society depends on God’s revelation of himself, in exactly 
the same way in which all social life is the working out of 
God’s plans. 


Relation of 
Psychical 
Activity to 
other forms 
of Social 
Activity. 


Inasmuch as the true unity of society is psychical 
rather than physical, it is evident that all forms of social 
activity find their goal and their true explana¬ 
tion in the distinctly psychical activity of 
society. An industrial class becomes a society 
only when its members come to share the same 
psychical life; directly such a development of 
psychical bonds makes the industrial class more 
stable, until sometimes its fixedness stands in the way of 
progress; indirectly, the development of these higher 
forms of activity brings more potent stimuli to bear on 
the economic life, and lends to the economic structure of 
society that general stability which gradually unites those 
who share the same type of higher civilisation. And 
with the progress of civilisation, social and political life 
come to feel the same influences. The groups which are 
united in these forms of activity are at length determined 
rather by psychical differences than by any external law; 
the social and the political structure become at the same 
time more complex and more stable by the growth of 
higher bonds of union; while the presence of the highest 
ends and the highest motives may place the lower forms 
of social life on an entirely new plane. 

With reference to all the modes of social activity dis¬ 
cussed in the present chapter, it is important to bear in 
mind two points: (i) Each of these modes of 

Conclusion. i ^ h t • 

activity IS due to stimuli acting on the in¬ 
dividual mind, and each finds its expression in individuals; 
and (2) they are distinctly forms of social activity, in 
which men are united in social groups or societies, while 
institutions are simply social habits arising in connection 
with these forms of activity. 


CHAPTEE VII. 


THE INDUSTKIAL OEGANISATION OF SOCIETY. 

The economic activity of society has been defined as the 
activity due to man’s fundamental physical needs, the 
need of food and of clothing. Economic life 
Production (develops, as we have seen, in the three phases 
Important Circulation, consumption, and production ; 
Factor in and the discussion of industrial organisation 
Determining industrial institutions naturally follows 

OrganisaUon threefold division. It is the more 

necessary to treat industrial organisation 
from this threefold standpoint, for the three phases of 
activity do not develop simultaneously, nor do they have 
a co-ordinate influence on other modes of social activity. 
In general, the forms of production are so important as 
to determine the general character of the industrial 
organisation. The history of labour is part of the study 
of production; tools and machinery are the instruments 
of production; the stages of industrial development are 
marked by the development of methods and implements 
of production. At the same time, production can hardly 
be termed a form of economic activity till circulation 
intervenes and goods are produced for a market; and the 
motive for production is always found in the desire to 
“ consume.” 

The history of man’s nascent industrial life has 
ordinarily been written either as an account of the stone, 
and the bronze, and the iron ages—according to the 
material of which implements are made—or as an account 


122 


INDUSTRIAL ORGANISA TION OF SOCIETY. 


Early 
Industrial 
Life of Man. 
(1.) Stone 
Age. 


123 

of the hunting and fishing stage, the nomad stage, and 
the industrial stage of economic development 
—according to the main source of food. The 
former may be termed the archseological, the 
latter the ethnological, standpoint for the study 
of primitive man. The earliest pre-historic 
traces of man, found in many parts of the earth, are the 
stone implements which he used. The rude stone club, 
the chipped flint that served as spear-head or as knife, 
are to be dated back to geologic ages, when the climate 
and the flora and fauna of the temperate zone were very 
different from what they are at present. The gradual 
development of the club into the hammer, the hatchet, 
and the adze; of the chipped flint into the sharpened 
arrow-head, the polished knife, and chisel; of the hollowed 
stone into the bowl, and at length into the mill for 
grinding corn:—the gradual development of these stone 
implements can be traced in the fragments that have 
come down to us, and it throws much light on the dawn¬ 
ing reason which absolutely separated man from the other 
animals. 

The use of metal, bronze or iron, marks another distinct 
stage in early forms of industry. The metal knife or 
(2.) Bronze sword, the metal hatchet, are far superior to 
and Iron the best instruments of stone; and the bowl 
Ages. Qj. beaten metal, would come to be 

always used, were it not for the invention of pottery 
which partly took the place of metal. No sharp line 
separates the bronze and the iron ages; but when iron 
came to be smelted and worked with reasonable ease, 
the possibilities of metal tools were much increased and 
their cost diminished. 

Social im- social importance of the development 

portance of of tools lies in two directions. First, tools 
Development increase the range and variety, and conse- 
of Tools. quently the regularity, of the food supply. The 
use of the bone fish-hook and of the net means a new 


124 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 

source of food; the arrow from a bow is surer and swifter 
than the best spear or lance; fire gains much more 
general use in the preparation of food, when water can 
be boiled in pottery or metal vessels. Secondly, tools 
enable man better to secure himself against attacks of 
hostile beasts and hostile men. Almost every tool is 
also a weapon; and the tool-making, tool-using animal 
is in the end superior to the animal that has itself the 
greater strength or speed. It is not so much the security 
of the individual, as the security of small societies, that is 
gained by the use of better weapons. The small group 
secures a measure of permanence by its ability to defend 
itself against the world, and the foundations of political 
and industrial society are laid. 

The development of tools has this farther effect on the 
beginnings of industrial organisation, that it encourages 
Early differentiation of industrial activity. The 

Differentia- original difference between the sexes has always 
tion of remained the basis of social differentiation ; 

but even this difference was made more 
marked by tools which busied the husband 
abroad, or gave wider range to what the wife should do 
at home. Again, not every man could make tools that 
required skill, and some would use one implement better 
than another. At length the small group of tool-users, 
the tribe or the village unit, would be a more compact 
unit because the different members depended on each 
other for the satisfaction of the common economic 
needs. 

The ethnologist is wont to view early economic history 
in a slightly different light. He finds the more back- 
Source of ward races of mankind depending on different 
Food marks sources of food. Some depend for food on 
Stages in game, others on their flocks and herds, others 
Development. their yearly crops. Agriculture surely 

goes along with a higher social life than is ordinarily 
found among hunting or nomad peoples, and the custom 


INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION OF SOCIETY. 125 

has arisen of referring to the three means of satisfying 
economic needs, as three stages of economic develop¬ 
ment. The view is only in part correct, but it suggests 
the very great importance of the source of food (and 
clothing) in determining the industrial organisation of a 
society. 

In different parts of the American continent are found 
tribes that depend mainly on game for food, all the way 
(1) The lowest savagery up to the very verge 

Hunting of civilisation. The effect of this mode of 

stage. Its subsistence on social life varies, of course, 

Social with the abundance and regularity of the 

supply of game, but in general it produces 

societies of much the same type. The size of the group 
is necessarily limited, except where waters bring large 
shoals of fish within easy reach of the fisherman. 
Ordinarily, only a very scanty population could be 
supported; and in cases where a tribe became large, it 
all but fell apart of itself, as its members travelled far 
in search of food. And these economic conditions do not 
especially favour the intercourse of different tribes, for 
the presence of the hunter in the domain of another 
tribe inevitably suggests trespass. Again, this form of 
“industry” favoured strongly an unsettled life. A fixed 
village was possible, and even common in some parts of 
the Western half of the continent, but more commonly 
the so-called Indian village was a sort of rendezvous 
where they settled at certain seasons of the year. In 
consequence of the roving life, the basis of the state was 
simply and only the ties of blood and custom, and the 
higher forms of social life had little or no opportunity 
of development. The manner of life of the successful 
hunter encouraged the virtues ^and excellencies of the 
individual. His own power to rhad nature and under¬ 
stand animals, his own cunning in outwitting them, his 
own endurance in their pursuit, these made the hunter 
an independent man by nature. Independence and 


126 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


individuality, thus developed, affected the whole range 
of social life, and made the state entirely democratic 
in its character. 

On the American continent examples of nomad life 
are rare, because there were so few animals that proved 
suited for domestication. But in Asia and 
in many parts of Africa, not only the dog 
and the hen, but soon cattle and goats and 
sheep were domesticated, and furnished man 


(2.) The 
Nomad 
Stage, and 
the Kind of 
Society 
Developed. 


with a far more abundant and more regular 


supply of food than could be secured by 
hunting.' The Hebrew accounts of shepherds in Palestine 
perhaps furnish the most familiar picture of the nomad 
life. Used for keeping flocks, the same area produced 
much more food for man, so that the population of 
nomad races became correspondingly denser than in the 
case of races living on game alone. This mode of life 
did not favour the individualism of the hunter’s life, 
for no one man could keep cattle alone to good advan¬ 
tage. Groups of moderate size, which could care for 
their common herds and protect them together, were 
naturally best suited for this kind of life. So we find 
now the small clan, now the large family, living on the 
products of the herd that they owned and kept in 
common. The necessity of protection for property 
demanded a much more highly developed political life; 
and as different clans lived in closer proximity, the 
intercourse between them would commonly be more 
active. Before the cultivation of grass as a crop, the 
life of nomad peoples was unsettled, as they wandered 
in search of food for their herds; so that, in spite of the 
more developed social life, the same obstacle to a high 
development of culture continued to exist. 

Eeturning again to North America, W'e find that 
tobacco and “ Indian corn ” were widely cultivated by 
tribes that still depended largely on game for food, while 
in Africa and Asia both hunting races and nomad races 


INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION OF SOCIETY. 127 

turned to agriculture for a better supply of food. Cattle 
(3.) Agricul- could be maintained better, and in larger num- 
tural stage; bers, when the natural supply of grass was 
«odal^Life°^ increased by artificial care. The cereals were 
more easily stored for long periods, and 
furnished food when other sources failed. Moreover, 
agriculture permitted a far denser population than could 
have been maintained before, and people could live in 
closer quarters. Agriculture generally deserves to be 
regarded as the beginning of civilisation. It required 
a settled life, and permitted life in considerable towns; 
it required such political life as would grant ample 
protection to large areas of crops in the fields; it was 
most successful when such social differentiation existed 
as permitted the utilisation of slave labour to prosecute 
the cultivation of the soil with regularity and persistence. 
In a word, it required civilised life before it could be 
undertaken, and it furnished strong motives to higher 
civilisation. 

The most marked feature of the change from the hunt¬ 
ing stage and the nomad stage to the agricultural stage, is the 
Increase in gi'e^t increase in the differentiation of labour, 
the Dififeren- In the hunting stage all men are theoretically 
tiation of equal, though differences of age, strength, and 
skill actually introduce some differences in 
their pursuits. The nomad life encourages the formation 
of small groups, in which one person is master, if not 
owner, while several others care for the flocks and the 
products of the flocks under his direction. In such a 
large family, household, or clan, the skill of one as 
carpenter or tent-maker, of another in preparing the rude 
utensils of their simple life, of others in other lines, 
would be utilised under the direction of the master, even 
while all united in the regular business of caring for the 
flocks. With the development of agriculture, and the 
consequent increase in size of the social group, the 
occasional differentiation of frnction becomes a true 


128 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


differentiation of the labourers. When agriculture was 
no longer a sporadic method of eking out the food supply, 
but the normal and regular source of food, the village 
community arose as the natural form of social organisa¬ 
tion. These communities, which mark the point to which 
the social life of civilised states can be traced back with 
any assurance, consisted of groups of families or clans, 
each of which was organised much like the group of 
nomad life, though on a smaller scale. Each family, or 
clan, cultivated its share of the fields of the community 
under the direction of its head—but the heads of families 
were subject in turn to the chief of the village, and often¬ 
times farther differences of rank existed. The work of 
the house carpenter, and the Cartwright, and the smith, 
was frequently the lot of particular individuals, who 
were in part supported from the fruit of the other’s 
labour; and while all the women might spin and weave, 
such arts as dyeing and special ornamentation, would 
often be carried on by one or two in behalf of the whole 
community. Some men, loosening their connection with 
any one community, would engage in commerce, bringing 
precious metals and jewels, fancy cloths, important 
minerals like salt, etc., from place to place. Such seems 
to have been the industrial organisation of the early 
community, which developed into the town .or city and 
the larger state. 

The farther study of industrial organisation, industrial 
institutions, and their social importance, necessarily 
A Exchan g threefold division according to 

and the which industrial activity develops. Begin- 
gradual ning, therefore with the subject of circulation 
Development or exchange, we recall the fact that this is 
Ma^et really the beginning of the particular form of 
social activity which deserves the name econo¬ 
mic. It is the idea of exchange, and somewhat regular 
exchange, which characterises economic activity as such. 
The general type of the early merchant still exists in the 


INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION OF SOCIETY. 129 

case of bold adventurers who set forth into the wilds of 
Africa, it may be; they provide themselves with gAy 
cloths and other products of civilisation that please/ the 
savage, hold a sort of market as they reach some savage 
tribe, and return at length with the stores of ivory and 
spices and perhaps slaves which they have gained by 
barter. As soon as visits of this sort come to be expected 
with any regularity, so that the savage prepares a stock 
of goods for the trader, genuine economic activity has 
begun on the basis of an occasional market. The next 
step toward a higher development of exchange is when a 
market, or fair, is held regularly at some definite place to 
which both buyers and sellers come. The Church feasts 
of the Middle Ages furnished such regular occasions for 
exchange, and gave the name “JAsse” to the fairs that 
originated at times when mass was celebrated. The 
influence of the great annual fairs, at which all wholesale 
and most of the retail trade was conducted, has hardly 
disappeared in England, and is still very important on the 
Continent. Gradually the advantage of regular posts of 
trade, open and accessible at all times, has been recog¬ 
nised ; and the “ shop ” or “ store ” has taken the place of 
recurring markets as the ordinary method of exchange. 

In the process of exchange, two institutions arise 
which are very important objects of study for the science 
1 . The Insti- which deals with economic phenomena in de- 
tutionof tail. The first of these is the institution of 
Money. nioney. Exchange is immensely fa(^litated by 
the use of some recognised standard of value. What the 
standard is, of course depends largely on the relative 
convenience of the different possible objects; but it takes 
its place as the standard of value by a sort of social 
agreement. It is money when it is recognised and re¬ 
ceived as money. When a good standard of value comes 
into use, the sphere of exchange is indefinitely extended; 
parties more distant from each other can enter into com¬ 
mercial relations; and the goods exchanged need not be 


130 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


limited by the present wants of the parties. In fact the 
standard of value of civilisation penetrates into the 
distant parts of the earth almost as soon as rum itself. 
The effect of this unity of the commercial world upon the 
higher forms of social life can hardly be estimated. Iden¬ 
tity of ideas and of tastes is preceded by identity of mpney. 

The second class of institutions arising in the process 
of exchange have to do with transportation. The amount 
2 Institu- goods exchanged at any given time, and the 
tions of possible range of a market, depend on the 
Transporta- facility with which goods are transported. 

According to Proudhon, “to draw a loaded cart 
on the natural soil requires one-quarter or one-tifth the 
energy necessary to carry the weight in question; on good 
roads in ordinary condition, only ’o 8 of this amount of 
energy is necessary; on oak rails the figure is reduced 
to *022; finally, on steel rails in good condition it is only 
*005, or -003 of the original amount; . . the increase in 
distance carried, in rapidity and regularity of transporta¬ 
tion, can hardly be estimated.’' Along with this apparatus 
for the transportation of merchandise, there has grown up 
an apparatus for the rapid transportation of intelligence, 
which is hardly less important in its effect on commerce. 
The post, which was originally a military affair, has come 
to serve primarily an economic purpose. The condition 
of any important market is made known all over the 
globe as quickly as in distant parts of the same city, and 
the London buyer does not have any considerable advan¬ 
tage in time over the New York buyer, when goods are 
offered for sale in London. Finally, the institutions for 
the transportation of money have kept pace with the 
means of transmitting intelligence. Orders on private! 
or government banks, which are received as readily as 
gold, are transmitted by mail or by telegraph, and the 
process of circulation is complete. For the purposes of 
business, space and time are all but annihilated, and the 
world is made in reality a single market. 



INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION OF SOCIETY. 131 


War has been the most important external factor in 
the origin and development of circulation, and' this in- 
War and the A^^ence has been exerted in two ways. In the 
Development first place the earliest collections of goods to 
ofCircuia- be distributed or exchanged, consisted of the 
booty which a successful band of marauders 
brought home with them. Military leaders and their 
followers would desire to exchange the products of war, 
such as slaves, for the products of peace. And secondly 
war brought different tribes of people into contact with 
each other, and opened highways of communication 
between them. The world is enlarged, and men learn 
that their wants and the wants of their neighbours can 
be met most easily by exchange. For a strong man, to 
take a thing may seem the easiest way to get it; but the 
first and perhaps the longest step in progress, is the 
recognition that this course is destructive, while fair 
interchange of goods benefits all the parties concerned. 
Violence breaks a path for progress, and commeree follows 
in the track of war. 

The first and most important effect of circulation, or 
the exchange of commodities on the other modes of 
social activity, is the well-known fact that the 
circulation of goods always favours the inter¬ 
action of minds. Intellectual intercourse in 
its various forms follows commercial inter¬ 
course, so that the development of commerce 
is the immediate precursor of progress. In 
the settlement of a new country, the school and the 
church and the court, follow the pioneers of trade. In 
an older country the lack of good means of communica¬ 
tion results in stagnation ; custom is unchanging, and 
the past becomes a barrier to progress instead of the 
basis of advance.^ The second effect of a widening 


Eifect of 
Circulation 
on Other 
Modes of 
Social 
Activity. 


^ De Greef, Sociologies II. p. 41, has drawn an instructive comparison 
between the New Greece on the one hand, and Roumania to-day or 
Greece a century ago, 011 the other. The new political life of Greece has 


132 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


commerce on other forms of social life, is the enlarge¬ 
ment of the social world along other lines than the 
purely commercial. The “ world ” in which we live, 
the social lines which bound that part of the race to 
which we feel akin, the psychical life of which we feel 
ourselves an integral part, the political world in which 
our state has its proper sphere of activity, all of these 
are enlarged with the enlargement of the commercial 
world. Civilisation follows commerce into the jungles, 
through the desert, and toward the poles. Civilisation 
will touch every part of the globe when trade has opened 
the way for it. And the third effect of commerce, with 
its. complex bonds now uniting the whole world, is to 
develop closer and more complex bonds in all other forms 
of social activity. Economic activity could never have 
attained its present high development without the aid of 
political protection, and judicial arbitration, and the 
special restraints, as well as the special stimuli, of the 
moral code. Conversely, social rank depends on economic 
conditions; the state is made stable and conservative, as 
well as progressive, by the economic interests which lie 
at its foundation; the intellectual and the moral unity of 
society is a gradual achievement, for which the bonds of 
common economic function ever prepare the way. Men 
trade together and learn that they are brothers; just as 
once they fought together and found that there existed 
other beings than themselves who deserved respect. 

The second standpoint from which the economic 
activity of society may be considered, is also marked by 
some measure of special organisation, and by 
institution of far-reaching importance. 
“Economic Here, as we have seen, is the point where 
Man.’’ economic stimuli find their direct application; 

gone hand in hand with a new economic life ; the means of 
rapid transportation within Greece, and increased facilities for foreign 
commerce, constitute the basis of that progress which has been so 
remarkable. 


INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION OF SOCIETY. 


men produce that they may exchange their products 
for what they desire to “consume”; in other words, the 
generalised expression for the economic motive is the 
desire to consume. The orthodox political economy has 
been wont to solve this whole question very simply, not 
to say summarily, by postulating an “ economic man,” a 
man ruled by the desire for wealth. Undoubtedly, this 
last expression has meant the desire for what wealth 
brings, and not simply love of money; in other words, 
economics has started out with the important postulate 
that the units it is to consider, are governed by what 
it terms a desire to “consume.” Such mathematical 
abstraction has brought with it both clearness and con¬ 
fusion ; clearness in that the motive force of economic 
life is reduced to a single unit; confusion in that this 
unreal abstraction has often been obliged to do duty for 
the richness of concrete truth. 

In fact, the true “economic man” is the product of 
his age; his desires change as society develops; nor is 
Man’s Needs change unimportant, for the whole face 

Change in economic life changes with each change in 

Content, in the units that enter into it. This economic 
Imperative- jg being whose needs and emotions 

were discussed in Chapter V., and consump¬ 
tion is simply the use of what is acquired in 
exchange to satisfy his needs and emotions. The 
particular content of man’s needs changes entirely with 
his habit of life. Uncooked flesh is followed by roast 
or boiled meat as the hunter’s diet, while the shepherd 
lives on the products of the animal—milk, butter, and 
cheese; vegetable diet changes from nuts and fruits to 
parched grains and cakes of crushed or ground corn. 
The need which a given man feels is not the need of 
food, but rather the need of the flesh or the dish of 
pottage, by which he has been wont to satisfy hunger; 
the desire for this particular object governs his action 
in the effort to acquire it. So the imperativeness of 


ness, in 
Variety. 


134 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


man’s need varies with the stage of social development. 
The savage goes for days on a most meagre diet, and 
then when he has game he gorges himself with food. 
It is only when the torpid sleep after such a feast has 
lasted for days that reviving hunger drives him to 
activity once more. But the civilised man requires 
“three meals a day,” and the content of each one is 
imperatively determined by his social position. Nor 
is the change in the variety of his needs any less im¬ 
portant. Practically the simple demand for nourish¬ 
ment and warmth has been replaced by the complex 
need of the thousand and one things which constitute 
the standard of living; a carriage may seem more 
necessary than bread, sealskin garments more necessary 
than blankets. 

The study of the particular forms which these needs 
assume, is the source of most valuable light on the 
Physical economic life of a given age. Such study defines 
Needs deter- at once the motives to economic activity, 
mine Eco- and the lines which this activity must follow, 
nomic Life, student learns to understand the 

units of economic life, and it is on this basis alone that he 
can discover the relation of the units in the industrial 
organisation. The circulation and exchange of com¬ 
modities, intervening between the production of goods 
and their immediate consumption, follows man’s im¬ 
mediate needs, so far as his needs find social recognition. 
Production, too, is to meet the market demand for the 
goods which men call for. 

The greatest change in the use to which men put 
their products, occurs when they begin to store them 
The Institu- future use, instead of applying them to the 
tion of satisfaction of immediate desire. The institu- 
Property property, to which so much fruitful 

study has recently been devoted, had humble beginnings 
and developed but slowly. Its social origin is quite 
generally admitted. It is probable that property began 


INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION OF SOCIETY. 135 

with articles worn about the person, clothing, amulets, 
and especially adornments, at a time when even weapons 
and the simple utensils of cooking were the property of 
the clan or group. Along with the development of the idea 
of individuality came important extensions of the idea of 
individual property. Weapons and utensils, finally dwell¬ 
ing-places, flocks and herds, were reckoned by the tribe as 
the property of its individual members, though the mem¬ 
bers of a family have never lost all claim on the possessions 
of the head of the family; these articles became individual 
property because members of society so reckoned them. 
After a long period real estate also came to be reckoned 
as the property of individuals, though still in a somewhat 
restricted sense, for the state preserves certain rights over 
its territory. 

The social importance of property is universally recog¬ 
nised. It means a new’ form of consumption, a new use 
Social Import-^^^ wealth—goods may be effectively stored, 
ance of In connection with it there arises a new social 

Property stimulus, the love of acquisition. Property 
means power over one’s fellow men, and the love of power 
is constantly acquiring range as an economic stimulus, 
while apparently it loses power as a political stimulus. 
When the idea of property centered in the elan, it helped 
to make the clan a compact unit. The gradual recognition of 
individual property w’as a great power in developing the 
nascent individualism of the members of the clan. Once 
developed, the idea of individual property sapped the 
roots of the clan life; it was a potent factor in over¬ 
throwing the matriarchal family, which, was commonly so 
closely connected wdth the clan relationship; it became 
the basis of the higher type of psychical life. Perhaps its 
most important social effect has come to be in the fact 
that the possession of property is so generally the basis of 
social differentiation. In earlier times physical force, 
later institutions of caste, were the basis of differentia¬ 
tion in society. To-day, in the stable forms of society, 


36 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


wealth is the most universally recognised source of power, 
so that social rank is often determined by the possession 
of wealth. 

In the study of industrial organisation, the third phase 
of economic activity is most important. Beginning 
C Produc within the early social group long before it 
tion. ReiationCan called economic production, it is 
to Circula- gradually dominated by the demands of a 
tion, to Con- developing market, until in the modern city, 
sumption family finds it possible to give up abso¬ 

lutely every form of domestic production, and rely solely 
on what an extensive market will furnish. While it is, 
of course, the development of circulation and exchange 
which is responsible for so great a change in the character 
of production, the institution of property which has just 
been considered, is an indispensable condition. Property 
previously acquired must be used in production, if it be 
only to support the producer till he can reap the fruit of 
his labour in the exchange of his products; capital, 
property utilised for the production of goods to be 
exchanged, is the very basis of economic production, £yid 
it is the growth of capital that has made possible the 
rapid development of industry during the present century. 

The institutions by means of which production has 
been carried on, have varied exceedingly in different ages. 
Institutions basis of a particular 

of Produc- type of social life. The earliest organisation 
tion. for this purpose was some form of slavery. 

Slavery. Inertia is an almost universal characteristic of 
savage races; men only work under compulsion, either 
the compulsion of immediate need, or the compulsion of 
superior human force—and the effort to satisfy immediate 
need is so spasmodic that it cannot be utilised for the 
production of any but the simplest objects. When cap¬ 
tives taken in war could be utilised for work instead of 
being destroyed or eaten, a genuine means of production 
was secured; and unproductive as slave-labour seems to 


INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION OF SOCIETY. 137 

us, it was immensely more productive than labour to 
which the only spur was hunger. The early civilisations 
of the East show what has has been accomplished with 
this means of production; indeed, economic production 
rested on no other basis in Greece and Eome. 

Feudalism marks a decided advance on slavery, for the 
relation of master and servant was more permanent, and 
Feudalism the system required and developed greater 
as a Mode of ability in the servant. The serf had certain 
Production, of j^jg own, not wholly identical with 

his lord’s, and his position depended largely on the way in 
which he cared for these interests. Thus the serf was 
trained for centuries in the school of partial freedom, 
till at length the power to work for a future reward 
w^as a greater stimulus than external compulsion. Then 
masters gradually learned that hired labour was more 
profitable than forced labour, and the principle of 
serfdom, like the principle of slavery before it, had to 
give way to a higher form of organisation for production, 
i^aturally the change took place much earlier in the 
towns than in the country. 

Here, circumstances favoured the economical indepen¬ 
dence of the household, provided it paid the dues assessed, 
The House- performed the military service required, 

hold Unit in The household became the unit for production, 
Production, and it continued to be so until conditions were 
changed by the introduction of machinery. Often it was 
necessary for craftsmen to unite in guilds to secure their 
rights. Whether or not he was a member of a guild, the 
artisan was far enough from real freedom of initiative, 
nevertheless he was able to work for himself instead of 
working for another. 

Produc- modern industrial system which has 

tionhy grown up with the introduction of machinery 
Machinery and the consequent organisation of produc- 
in Factories. large factories, scarcely a vestige of 

the formal external restraint remains. Ability to worlc 


133 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


with vigour, continuity, and skill, is almost the only 
factor which determines the workman’s position in the 
industrial system; while the relation between employer 
and employed has been reduced, more and more, to a 
strictly economic basis. The removal of each phase of 
external restraint on labour, and the increasing free¬ 
dom of labourer and employer, have been attended at 
each stage by a wider differentiation of economic classes, 
so that the industrial world is more complex than ever 
before. 

Each of these forms of industrial organisation is the 


basis for a particular form of the higher kinds of social 
activity. Slavery means a sharp line of dis- 
tinction between master and slave in ‘‘ social ” 
Organisation intercourse; the tribe which keeps slaves has a 
on other different political development from the tribe 

Modes of without slaves, and it is just this difference 

Activity which separates most widely the developed 

states of antiquity from the modern state; 

moreover, slavery cultivates certain habits of mind which 
control the psychical development both of masters and 
slaves. Under the feudal system an aristocracy of birth 
determines the lines of “social” intercourse, and gives 
rise to peculiar social institutions and peculiar social 
ideals; the feudal state is a confederacy of feudal lords; 
chivalry is but one of the peculiar psychical products 
of the system. Finally, in the present age of industrial 
freedom, differences in economic capacity are fully de¬ 
veloped ; the difference between individuals and between 
families tends to increase from generation to genera¬ 
tion ; yet the dead level of barbarism still remains, 
so that every advance introduces wider differences into 
the economic world. Such a society fosters an aristocracy 
of wealth; political power is in the hands of the third 
estate; business integrity and habits of hard work are the 
excellencies most highly prized. 

With the economic development of society, the peculiar 


INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION OF SOCIETY. 


139 


character of the economic group has been growing more 
Ideal of the more distinct, until to-day the economic 
Economic ideal is exerting a great influence on the 
Group. character of other social groups. The econo¬ 
mic group proper is not marked by any real solidarity 
of life and interest, rather it has tended to drift away 
from this general solidarity as it has become distinct. 
Competition is commonly represented as the basis of 
modern industrial society, and competition involves free 
circulation of labour. The ideal of economic relationship 
is free association, that is, the group in economic life is 
composed of men who unite in common activity because 
they recognise that their interests are identical, and who 
feel entirely free to leave the group as soon as their 
economic interests diverge. The labourer is bound to 
his master by no tie except such as he voluntarily 
assumes; he has all the rights and all the responsi¬ 
bility which belong to an independent economic unit. 
The trade union has only served to emphasise the in¬ 
dependence of the individual labourer by lending to 
each one the strength which comes from association. 
Attempts have, indeed, been made to bind individuals 
together in more permanent unions for economic purposes, 
as in the case of profit-sharing and co-operative societies, 
but they have been sporadic, and they have met with no 
lasting success. The ideal of the economic group is the 
absolute economic freedom of both master and labourer; 
although the human interest that binds every man to 
those who become his neighbours, canriot fail to lend its 
sanction to the group united by economic interests. 

Historically it may be questioned whether the indi¬ 
vidualistic view of life, which is becoming clearly the char- 
influence acteristic of the economic man, had its origin 
of this in economic relations. Practically, however, no 
Ideal on fervid preaching of the rights of the individual 
Social Life, powerful to affect society down 

to its very foundations as the constant enforcing of the 


140 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


rights and responsibility of the individual in the indus¬ 
trial life of this industrial age. It tends to break down 
the old “ social ” relations, and even marriage is regarded 
as a temporary contract rather than the beginning of a 
common life. The democratic state is made little more 
than a “ social contract,” and the university and even 
the church are often regarded as associations of the 


economic type in another sphere of common life. The 
cause of this abnormal influence of economic ideals is to 
be found, I believe, in the present abnormal development 
of industrial interests, and it can only be remedied by a 
broader development of social life on higher planes. 

In conclusion, it is hardly too much to say that 
economic activity is at the very basis of society. 
Fundamental Economic changes and crises result in changes 
Character of and crises in all phases of social life; as for 
Economic example, the effect of depression in business 
Activity. marriage and birth rate, which Buckle has 

attempted to trace. Habits of industry are at the basis 
of political stability. Industrial connection has often 
preceded political connection, even as to-day commerce 
is the strongest influence in the development of inter¬ 
national law. Higher types of intellectual, moral, and 
religious life can only be developed where men are 
protected from the constant pressure of want and the 
constant fear of starvation. And the work-habit, de¬ 
veloped so slowly in the course of industrial progress, 
is no less necessary than leisure for genuine psychical 
progress. “ The economic structure of society is the real 
basis on which the juridical and political superstructure 
is raised, and to which definite forms of social thought 
correspond; in short, the mode of production determines 
the character of the social, political, and intellectual life 
generally.” ^ 


^ Quoted from Karl Marx: Kapital, on the title-page of Lafarguc, The 
Evolution of Property. Loudon, 1890. 


CHAPTEE Vltl. 


THE FAMILY AS A SOCIAL UNIT. 


The family is the basis of the state. This phrase, so 
frequently repeated by the earlier students of society, 
The Family ^as been attacked in recent years by two 
and the classes of opponents — by those who believe 
state. civilised society ought to rest on some 

other foundation, and by investigators who found that the 
theory of the historic relation of state and family, with 
which the phrase had been associated, was entirely false. 
But the very study which destroyed its old meaning has 
made it pregnant with new and deeper meaning. 

The older theory of the relation of the family to the 
state is simple enough. It began with the family, treated 
the clan as an enlarged patriarchal family, 
with the patriarch frequently left out; the 
tribe it regarded as an overgrown clan, and the 
beginning of the state was a tribe that had 
outgrown its former organisation.^ Thus the 
family is literally the basis of the state. The 
argument in favour of this theory is mainly the argument 
‘^6 consensu gentium,'' for the clan was traced back to a 
common ancestor, and the tribe and the nation to 
common ancestors yet further back, among the races 
best known to students. These races—and accordingly 
those who studied them — believed that descent was 


Earlier 
Theory of 
the Rise of 
the State 
from the 
Family. 


^ Cf. L. Lange, Romische Alterthumer, 3te Aufl. 1876. S. 102 sqq., 
where the organisation of the Roman State is explained very much in 
this way. 


141 


142 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


always reckoned in the male line, for the father was 
the head of the family. The best and ablest defence of 
this position is found in the works of Sir Henry Maine, 
who argues from laws and institutions back to the time 
when they arose, and shows that they presuppose a 
patriarchal family. Nor has his argument been seriously 
impugned by later students. They have rather sought 
to show that Maine’s results were far from ultimate, and 
that the history of another world remained to be written, 
a world existing before the date back to which Maine’s 
investigations had reached. 

Bachofen was, I believe, the first to attack this earlier 
theory, then universally accepted. In his Mutterrecht 
The Family Called attention to some facts which had 
in the Matri- been misinterpreted by scholars, and to others 
archal stage, were new, in proof of the thesis that a 

matriarchal family had quite generally preceded the 
patriarchal type. McLennan, in England, working inde¬ 
pendently, argued from the prevalence of wife-capture as 
a symbol back to the time when it was an actual fact, 
and connected with this the prohibition of marriage 
within the tribe. He attempted to prove (i), that in 
early times all women were held in common by the tribe; 
(2), that female infanticide often made wife-capture 
necessary, and frequently resulted in a polyandrous 
family, and (3), that in this polyandrous family the 
husbands of the same wife were gradually limited to 
brothers, and at length the patriarchal family arose with 
one man at its head. The argument in favour of these 
propositions included (i), examples of loose family 
relations in savage tribes (the author assigning the reason 
that in the polyandrous family the particular father is not 
known), and (2), some few and isolated examples of the two 
forms of polyandry which serve as types. The two main 
positions, namely, the absence of anything that might be 
called family relations in the early history of the clan, 
and the prevalence of the matriarchal family before the 


THE FAMILY AS A SOCIAL UNIT. 


143 


existence of the patriarchal family and monogamous 
marriage, have been widely illustrated by authors in 
England and on the continent, until they form the creed 
of a school. 

A third group of writers differ from those just 
mentioned mainly in their interpretation of the facts. 
Results Letourneau regards the primitive family as an 
accepted by early form of property, and explains its de- 
Eecent velopment on this basis. Starcke shows that 
the matriarchal family tends to produce 
heterogeneity, and so fails in itself to explj^in the forms 
of tribal relationship with which it is most closely 
associated. And Westermarck finds evidence that the 
monogamous family has been, perhaps, the commonest 
form during the whole history of the race. These 
writers agree in urging that (i), there is absolutely no 
evidence to prove a state of original promiscuity, though, 
as a rule, family ties are looser among less civilised tribes, 
and that (2), the matriarchate is not universal, and con¬ 
stitutes no evidence at all for the original absence of 
family relations. 

These researches have by no means led to conclusive 

results on all points, but the following points are fairly 

.0 well substantiated ; First, there is no reason to 

1. The Prin- think that any human race was ever without 

cipies of the idea and practice of comparatively per- 

Marnage- rnanent marriaoe unions. In the struggle for 
Unions. . ^ . 

existence, a species must be very prolific in 

order to survive, or else it must care for its young; and 
this care must continue longer as the period of im¬ 
maturity becomes longer. Among many birds, and some 
higher apes, there seems to be monogamous marriage for 
life; and many species of apes care for their young until 
they are several years old. In the lowest stages of 
human development marriage unions would continue 
only during the pleasure of the parties; but what 
evidence we have rather tends to show that commonly 


144 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


the parties chose to remain together, even for life. When 
a man gained the power to treat his wife as private 
property, the woman was naturally degraded and may 
often have lost all motive to chastity. But what was 
lost in the wife was more than made up in the husband, 
and this stage probably meant an increase in the stability 
of the family. When at length the wife was no longer a 
mere slave, though her husband still retained many rights 
over her, a truer union was again possible. This eleva¬ 
tion may have been due to the fact that the woman went 
to her husband from another protector, and thus was not 
so completely under his control. Finally, we have to-day 
at least the idea of a permanent affiliation, in which each 
member is complementary to the other, and on this basis 
marriage has received new meaning, moral and' intel¬ 
lectual, civil and religious. The truth seems to be that 
while sexual relations have never been absolutely confined 
to the family, there has always been a family; and that 
as the principle of the family has advanced from animal 
association to property in women, then to limited rights 
of the husband, and finally to broader association in the 
higher developments of psychical life, the family has 
constantly gained in permanence and restraints to pro¬ 
miscuous intercourse of the sexes have been correspond¬ 
ingly strengthened. 

The question as to the number of persons involved 
in the marriage relation should be made subordinate to 
2. Polyan- questions discussed in the preceding para- 
dry, Poly- graph. The polygynous family does indeed 
gyny, and mean a very different social organisation from 
Monogamy, polyandi'ous; but the essential question 
is still whether the family is a form of property, or 
whether it is based on some lower or higher form of 
association. The relative numbers of men and women 
exert great influence on the marriage - relation. In 
earlier times polygyny was the result of success in 
wife-stealing, and polyandry was frequent when men 


THE FAMILY AS A SOCIAL UNIT. 


145 


outnumbered women. The reason is evident, for in an 
undeveloped society the sexes must ordinarily live 
together. Where descent was reckoned through females 
or not at all, either polyandry or polygyny could arise 
without difficulty, and the transition from one to the 
other would not necessarily be a violent one. The 
patriarchal family only permits some very limited form 
of polyandry, such as the possession of the same wife 
by brothers; on the other hand, based as it usually was 
on property rights, polygyny was perfectly normal. The 
monogamous family seems to have been always the 
commonest form, both because it was the most natural 
and practical, and because the numbers of the two 
sexes were generally about equal. The principle of 
property has, on the whole, favoured monogamy, as most 
men could support but one wife; and since the higher 
forms of the family are only possible as forms of union 
between one husband and one wife, this is the only type 
of family the sociological importance of which it will be 
necessary to discuss. 

Children have always been associated with parents, 
even among the higher animals, but the notion that 
the family includes more than two genera¬ 
tions, is a product of somewhat advanced 
and Pro- human culture. By nature the child is far 
perty Rights more closely associated with the mother than 
in the father, and thus blood-relationship 

fhe Fa^iy°^ would naturally be traced in the female line; 

uncertain paternity would also favour the 
family on the basis of the mother. On the other hand, 
when the sense for property had been developed, and 
had become the principle of the family, the children of 
the mother would naturally belong to the father because 
the mother belonged to him. Taking the family in the 
larger sense of stock, it may be matriarchal, in which 
case children derive position, or status, from the mother; 
while, after her death, the elder brother assumes authority 
L 


3. Blood 
Affiliation 


146 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


over his brothers and sisters, and over their children (his 
nephews and nieces). Or it may be patriarchal, the 
children belonging to the race of the father, remaining 
under his care and protection, and inheriting his property. 
In fact, traces of the matriarchal family and the matri¬ 
archal clan are to be found- in every quarter of the globe, 
and in almost every race. The evidence seems to show 
that the matriarchal family or clan has ordinarily 
preceded the patriarchal, though the proof is not com¬ 
plete. The important fact is that two influences have 
been at work in the formation of the larger family, 
namely, blood afifiliation and property rights; the former 
of the two was generally the earlier, the latter has 
conquered in the end by bringing the former into 
harmony with itself. In some interesting cases we may 
see the two principles at work simultaneously, as, for 
example, among those tribes of North American Indians 
which trace relationship through females, but permit the 
son, and not the nephew, to inherit his father’s property. 

I have outlined the results of recent study of the 
family in its historical development, because a knowledge 
of the different principles on which the family 
been based, is a necessary introduction to 
Economic any study of the family as a factor in society. 
Activity of The function of the family in the different 
EarTy^ '* modes of social activity has varied widely as 
Family. ifs character has changed. In the economic 
world the family has always been an im¬ 
portant factor. The lowest stage of what may be called 
the family resembles the highest yet developed, in that 
husband and wife were partners in the effort to satisfy 
the economic needs. In this partnership, undoubtedly, 
the greater share of drudgery fell to the wife, because 
the weaker one could be compelled to do more; this, 
however, does not mean that the lot of a savage’s wife is 
always a hard one, except in localities where it is very 
difficult to secure the means of subsistence. The more 


THE FAMILY AS A SOCIAL UNIT. 


147 


strenuous effort of war and hunting fell to the husband, 
nor was protection and the supply of game an unim¬ 
portant factor in the economic unit. The reaction of 
these common economic interests upon the family unit 
had no great effect in making any one family permanent; 
still, if one such partnership was dissolved, each party 
found it necessary to enter into another similar one in 
order to live with any comfort. The rise of the matri¬ 
archal family, with introduction of social status, gave 
the woman another position in society besides the 
position of a wife, and consequently made it possible 
for her to satisfy economic needs in some other way 
than as a wife. The immediate effect of this must have 
been to weaken the marriage relation as an economic 
bond, while, at the same time, it extended its reach. 

In the patriarchal family, the wife is the property of 
her husband, or at least entirely subordinate to him; the 
Later Forms economic relation is equivalent to that of 
of the master and slaves. The economic needs to be 
Family in met are no longer the needs of individuals but 
the Economic needs of the family, and it is the family in 
the person of its head which has to meet these 
needs. The family is an economic unit because all its 
members have disappeared from the economic world 
except its head. This absolute dependence of the mem¬ 
bers of the family upon the father and master, must 
have had an important effect in making the family a true 
and stable unity, as viewed from other standpoints. The 
patriarchate was the beginning and the foundation of 
stable society. As the power of the husband and father 
decreased, the unity, and in like manner the economic 
function, of the family came to rest on a new basis. Again 
it became a sort of partnership in which each party 
possessed certain rights and performed certain functions; 
again it became a social aggregate, and something more 
than a man and his goods. The modern family is a com 
plex unity in the economic world; the husband is the 


148 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


breadwinner, the wife is supposed to make the home, and 
the presence of children strengthens tliis complex unity 
by emphasising the difference between the work of 
father and mother, and by increasing the stimulus to the 
work of each. 

It is impossible to prophecy the future of the family in 
the economic world. Large changes are going on at the 

The Economic present time, as the result of the opening of 
Future of many new fields of economic activity to female 
the Family, labour. This movement, begun in part by 
philanthropists in order to enable women dependent on 
their own labour to support themselves, has been hastened 
rapidly by the low price of female labour, until to-day 
women are employed in almost every form of production 
suited to their capacity. Naturally the men who have 
been engaged in these forms of production, feel the result 
of this influx of new labour; some are displaced by 
women, all feel the effect of competition with persons 
ready to accept lower wages. The husband no longer 
receives sufficient wages to support his family, so that his 
wife is obliged to go into the factory with him; in hard 
times, unless his labour is really superior to his wife’s, he 
may be turned off before his wife, and the husband is 
supported by his wife. The evil effects of such a change 
are, of course, exaggerated during the transition period; 
but after all due allowance has been made for this fact, 
there can be no doubt that the change now going on is 
likely to have a most deleterious effect on family life. 
The necessity that the family be an economic unity is 
being destroyed; and whatever attacks the economic life 
of the family is sapping its foundation. This is a far 
more important problem in regard to the family than any 
laxness of the divorce laws. 

^ De Lestrade, EUments de Sociologie, p. 75 sqq ., has pointed out some of 
the evils which have folldwed the opening to women of new spheres of 
economic activity. He claims that it has attracted many away from a 
natural family life, instead of providing means of securing a honourable 
livelihood to those who could not otherwise provide for themselves. 


THE FAMILY AS A SOCIAL UNIT. 


149 


II. The 
Family 
and the 
“ Social” 
Activity of 
Society. 


As for the distinctly social life of society, the family is 
the only fixed, stable unit that is here developed. The 
matriarchal family taught men that the child 
never entirely lost his connection with the 
mother who bore him. Lines were fixed, 
determining to a certain extent the course of 
social life; blood-relationship became, and has 
ever remained, the basis of social relations. 
With the introduction of the patriarchal family the whole 
face of society was changed. The larger family had a 
tendency to become self-sufficient, if not exclusive; social 
position was determined both by birth and by economic 
conditions; social relations arose among those of the 
same social status. The change produced in distinctly 
social relations by the development of the modern family, 
may be seen by comparing society in a Christian country 
with society in a Mohammedan country to-day. Woman, 
has been emancipated from the position of a chattel, 
society centres in her parlour, and the reciprocal courte¬ 
ous relations of husband and wife are the signal for similar 
relations among men and women generally. But no proof is 
needed to show that the character of society is determined 
by the character of the family. 

Thirdly, the family unit has performed an important 

function in the psychical life of society. The family was 

III The school. It was true in the earlier 

Family and stages of society as it is to-day, that a man and 

the Psychicaia woman unite two mental worlds in one; the 

Life of horizon of each is widened to include that 

Society. 1. whieh the other has included, the desires and 
Intellectual. .pit , i • 

needs or each become the desires and needs 
of both. Every such union enlarges the mental vision 
of each party, and more than this, it increases the power 
of the stimuli to intellectual activity. The value of the 
family in stimulating the mind has always depended on 
the coordinate association of husband and wife, and in 
the absence of this the family may even be a hindrance to 


50 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


intellectual development; it may have satisfied the need 
of companionship without stimulating the need of in¬ 
tellectual companionship. Farther, the intellectual life 
of society depends on the family for the transmission 
of intellectual acquirements, and especially of intellectual 
interests. The school proper is a very modern institu¬ 
tion ; the child of the savage receives the language and 
the lore of his tribe in the family. The patriarchal family 
came to include the schoolmaster as a frequent appendage. 
Even the present elaborate school-system accomplishes 
but little except where it supplements the intellectual 
life of the home. There is an intellectual heredity, which 
is far more important than the transmission of mere 
knowledge in the home, as it is more important than 
any bodily heredity. The child shares the intellectual 
life of the home, his mind unfolds and is quickened into 
activity by its share in that life. Modes of thought 
peculiar to the father or mother reappear in the child; 
but, without doubt, the most valuable part of this mental 
inheritance are the intellectual needs, the love of truth, 
and the enjoyment of intellectual intercourse; occasionally 
these may be kindled by later association, properly they 
are the product of the home. The family stands for in¬ 
tellectual progress. 

There is no school to he compared with the family for 
the development of aesthetic taste and the appreciation 
of the beautiful. The child who is not taught 
at home to sympathise with the varying moods 
of Nature, and to enjoy the beautiful in his en¬ 
vironment, will probably go through life with 
eyes closed to half the world about him. Few 
teachers, except the parents, can develop the beginnings 
of literary taste in the child ; the “ innate ” love of music, 
and love of beautiful form and colour, is usually a product 
of the home life. The very relation of husband and wife 
tends to quicken the aesthetic sense. Outside the home, 
men are rubbing against each other, and every fibre of 


2. The 
Family 
trains the 
Aesthetic 
Tastes. 


THE FAMILY AS A SOCIAL UNIT. 


151 


their nature is called into play in the bitter struggle 
for existence. The family is a charmed circle, shielded 
from the outside world; here, if anywhere, in an 
atmosphere of sympathy and encouragement, the dor¬ 
mant love of beauty is quickened into life. The man 
whose days are spent in severe manual labour marries 
a factory girl; neither of them had lived any life other 
than the long days of work, and an occasional evening 
of rude jollity. And yet the new home shows the presence 
of a spirit foreign to the earlier life of either j an effort 
for beauty, oftentimes crude enough, is apparent in all 
its arrangements; the common love is the beginning of 
a higher life. 


The most important social function of the family con¬ 
cerns the moral life of the community. The new relations 
of the family tend to develop the moral person- 
Famiiy ality of husband and wife, father and mother, 
develops tiie In the first place, a new sense of responsibility 
Moral Life £3 developed. The single man, or, indeed, the 
Par^ts single woman, may forget to-morrow ; however 
rashly they act, they alone suffer the con¬ 
sequences ; why should one’s rooms be tidy, and one’s 
wages be saved ? All this is changed by marriage, for 
each party has his sphere, and is responsible for two 
persons in that sphere. He cannot be careless of 
another’s welfare, as he might be careless of his own. 
This is even more true as children come into the home. 
The husband and wife can suffer together, whether to 
attain some desired end, or to expiate some carelessness 
or sin; but the responsibility for helpless children is the 
strongest motive to use the opportunities of life earnestly 
and wisely. Secondly, the family relationship trains the 
parents in the moral power of self-sacrifice. Husband 
and wife live for each other, but as parents they learn 
more truly the joy of serving those they love. Personal 
happiness is sacrificed both in direct care of the child, and 
in providing for its present and future happiness; and in 


152 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


this sacrifice new and higher joy is found. The moral 
personality may be developed by the child, even after the 
man has been hardened to all other influences. Finally, 
as has already been suggested, the ideal in life is kept 
alive by the family relations. Here one’s sense of the 
dignity of life, and the dignity of virtue, is quickened; 
men learn anew the sacredness of duty, the absolute 
worth of honour and of truth. The typical union means 
a union of the highest, truest life, which can never be 
shared except in the family, for here alone can it receive 
perfect sympathy. No man is so strong, morally, that 
he is not aided in his purpose of right by a wife’s 
approval; no man is so degraded as not to feel the power 
of love. 

The child owes his moral nature, his conscience, and 
the beginnings of character, to the family life. The 
„ , family is a moral unit: the moral life of the 

Personality whole, as determined by the parents, is re¬ 
ef the Child fleeted in the moral life of each member. The 
Developed in virtues prized by the parents, the rules of 
the Family, which they lay down for themselves, 

the ideals which ennoble their lives and give them 
meaning, these are the influences which mould the moral 
life of the child. The more completely this ideal of 
moral solidarity of the family is realised, the better it 
fulfils its mission. This moral solidarity does not at 
all mean that complete subjection of the family to one 
iron will, which is sometimes seen. Unless the sub¬ 
ordination of children to parents is such a social union 
as to develop to the fullest extent the moral personality 
of each one concerned, it entirely fails of its mission. 
The family has been a direct hindrance to progress when 
the rule has been complete subjection to parents during 
their entire life; it has accomplished nothing when the 
son has been kept a child morally, until he has suddenly 
been dropped into the world and entirely cut off from 
family influences, at the age of physical maturity. It is 


THE FAMILY AS A SOCIAL UNIT. 


153 


necessary that the family be indeed a union of moral 
personalities, if it is to develop moral personality. 

The spiritual inheritance which a child may expect to 
receive from his parents, includes not only intellectual 
Moral In training and intellectual desires, not only the 
heritance distinctly moral rules and moral ideals, but 

includes also the family traditions and customs and 

Customs and beliefs. These customs form, as it were, the 
Usages. setting for morality ; they are the background 
on which the moral rules stand out clearly; 
at the same time they invest morality with a certain 
graciousness which never pertains to a morality learned 
from books, or from the rude experiences of life. These 
social usages not only render the moral life of the 
family attractive, but they constitute an additional 
safeguard and strength for the morality which has this 
source. 

Language and science may be learned in other schools; 
other associations may develop the aesthetic sense; moral 
, , habits and moral ideals depend in a peculiar 

inginthe upon the family. Society itself trains 

Family versus but rudely ill morals; it recognises only gross 
outward sins, it punishes harshly and un¬ 
sympathetically those who go astray. The 
fundamental conceptions of a true self- 
assertion and a generous self-sacrifice, are learned only in 
the family. The strong learn to resp6ct the weaker, the 
w'eak are encouraged to develop their strength by using 
it, under the infiuence of family love. The temperament 
of bold assertion in one, the cunning pliancy of another 
who overcomes by yielding—these are what society de¬ 
velops to supply the absence of this early training in the 
family. Again, the absoluteness of duty, and the true 
excellence of virtue, can be learned only in the family. 
Only a parent can say “ thou shalt,” and compel hearty 
obedience by the power of an overmastering love. The 
world says, “ Honesty is the best policy,” and the virtue it 


ingin General 
Society. 


154 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


demands cannot stand the strain when it no longer seems 
the best policy. “ Nothing succeeds like success,” men say, 
and success blots out every sin. Finally, those more 
delicate excellencies, honour, sympathy, and tact, are not 
to be learned outside the home. They rest of necessity 
on love of man, they can only develop under the shadow 
of a parent’s love. 

The moral heritage of each generation is the true basis 
of progress. The son must be equipped with the best 
manners and morals of his parents, or he 
Inheritance starts Oil a lower plane than he might. Were 
the Basis of ^ot for this spiritual heredity, each genera- 
real Progress. would be obliged to start at the very 
beginning, and to build a society without either bricks or 
mortar. It were bad enough if each generation had to 
invent its own language, and to work out a science and a 
philosophy with no gain from ages that had past. But 
the very basis of the progress of society is moral pro¬ 
gress, and moral progress depends on moral heredity 
working through the family. Hugo, speaking of S. 
Dumas, who died in defence of the right, says: “ 11 4 tait 
le produit de cette magnifique loi d’ascension qui la 
Eevolution a determinee, et qui veut que le fils soit plus 
que le pere.”^ 

From the standpoint of religion, the family does the 
same important work that it does for the moral life. 

Husband and wife may help one another in 
Religious other ways while holding different religious 
Unity of the convictions, but the true unity of the family 
Family. -g iji^possible when the inmost life of each 
member is lived apart; even when the religious life of 
each expresses itself in different, apparently opposite, 
ways, they cannot help influencing each other’s religious 
views, and a true family life can hardly fail to develop 
a religious side. In this intimate union, the religious 
life finds its best inspiration; God comes nearest to his 
^ Quoted by De Lestrade, Elements de Sociologies p. 90 . 


THE FAMILY AS A SOCIAL UNIT. 


155 


followers at the family altar, and the responsibilities and 
joys of the family open the heart to the divine life. 

Religion also is a part of that spiritual inheritance 
which the child receives from his parents. At the 
mother’s knee, children learn to know God 
and with a more vivid sense of his presence and 

Progress of his love than is gained in any other way; 
Religion and far away as one may wander, it is to the 
mother’s God that he returns. The divine 

the Family. 

authority, and righteousness, and love, find 
their first meaning in the loving commands of a parent, 
and the philosopher and the theologian continue to speak 
of God as the Father in heaven. Sharing the religious 
life of the family, entering into its religious aspirations, 
as w'ell as its modes of religious belief and worship, the 
child learns to know God for himself. Each false step 
is checked, each doubt is overcome in the presence of 
faith, each crisis resolved in higher life under the 
guidance of parental love. Here, again, progress is 
possible only when the family fulfils its duty in the 
development of spiritual life. Religion extends its sway 
• over new territory, and brings new spheres of social 
activity under its influence, only when one generation 
quickens religious life in the generation that follows. 
The religious motive increases in strength, and enters 
more deeply into the lives of those who accept it, only 
when the child may start with the religious life of his 
family, and keep this alive in new family relations. 

I have refrained from speaking of the position of the 
family in the state and of its duty to the state until 
4 The 9 ,fter treating the preceding topic, because the 
Function of political function of the family depends on its 
the Family place in the psychical life of society. The 
in Political faixiily is the basis of the state, because the 
citizen is the product of the family. For the 
state in particular, as for society in general, the principle 
of continuity and of progress finds its strongest support 


156 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


in the family. Here alone do the civic sentiments and 
virtues find a natural soil favouring their growth; loyalty 
to the state and love of one’s country must be developed 
in the home if their roots are to penetrate deeper than 
self-interest. The sense of civic responsibility has no 
genuine vigour if it waits to be called out by wrongs 
actually suffered from a corrupt administration. To-day 
public evils persist under every form of government, 
because men can hardly ever be made to realise their 
duty to the state until the burdens brought upon them 
become excessive in each individual case. Again, the 
power of self-sacrifice in behalf of one’s country is 
developed with other forms of self-sacrifice in the family. 
Prom the parents are learned both the value of the ends 
which may call forth self-devotion, and that moral energy 
which does not hesitate at any cost when the end justifies 
the sacrifice. Finally, the power to act with others is 
best learned in the family. This must be learned else¬ 
where, if not in the family; but he who goes into the 
world without it, must acquire it in the battle of life and 
at the cost of many severe blows. 


CHAPTER IX. 


THE STATE AS AN OEGAN OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 

The state was the earliest form of social life to receive 
careful study, and it has commanded the attention of men 
Methods with very different interests. By reason of the 
Used in the great divergence of views as to the real nature 
Science of of the State, and also because discussions of 
this topic have ordinarily assumed a technical 
character, it is peculiarly difficult to give a brief intro¬ 
duction to the study of the state as a social organ. There 
is no general agreement even as to the method by which 
valid results may he reached. Among those who regard 
politics as a science, and who would study the facts of 
political life as they actually exist, some study the state of 
to-day, others the state as it has developed towards its 
present form. The former school, which may he called 
analytic, has reached very important results, and through 
the writings of Bentham and Austin, has exercised a very 
important influence on political life, especially in England. 
The historical school, in all its different forms, seeks to go 
hack of what is seen to-day, and to explain present facts 
by showing how they arose. The writings of Sir Henry 
Maine have made this podtion familiar to English readers. 
Long before the careful usj cf these scientific methods in 
politics, and in a measure since their introduction, 
philosophy has been ready to explain the phenomena of 
the state. In the name of “reason,” systems of natural 
law have been propounded, deducing the state, its 
authority and its form, its functions and their organs, 

157 


158 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


from the nature of reasonable beings. Or again, a crude 
individualism has begun by postulating men without 
social relations, and then has introduced these relations 
by means of a social contract. Methods not very different 
from these in essential character are still used in France 
and Germany; philosophic systems discuss the validity of 
law, and outline the perfect state on the basis of natural 
principles discovered by reason. Apart from all question 
as to the truth of these results, it is the work of science 
to determine what the state is, not what it ought to be; 
and with this in view, I propose first to give an account 
of some typical earlier forms of the state, in order to show 
the principles on wdiich the state has been based, and the 
functions which it has performed for societ}^ 

The earliest germ of that political life which later 
develops into the state, is found in the temporary union 
A—1 The having some interests in common, for 

Beginnings the purposes of defence. The only source of 
of Political political cohesion was pressure from outside, 
and the only function of the temporary govern¬ 
ment was to defend members of the group from outside 
attack. The form of such a government might be a sort 
of oligarchy, since it was necessarily based on respect for 
those whose personal prowess and skill enabled the group 
to meet attack successfully. Even this slight beginning of 
political life can hardly arise until men recognise some 
common interests; frequently it is associated with the 
early development of clan-relationship, and utilises these 
ties of blood even when it does not coincide with the 
clan. 

The next distinct type of political organisation may be 
termed the tribal state, the state on the basis of blood- 
relationship. Some type of family, in later 
Tribe^State patriarchal family, formed the basis 

of the tribal state; this unit, held together by 
ties of blood and by economic ties, by a common authority 
and a common religion, was the stable element out of 


THE STATE AN ORGAN OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 159 

which states were constructed. Naturally, then, the 
state was regarded as a larger family; common descent 
of all citizens from a fictitious ancestor was postulated, 
in order that political union might have the sacred¬ 
ness awarded to ties of blood; a common religion arose, 
lending the sanction of another world—the world of the 
gods—to the duties and the ties of this world; trade 
with other nations was often forbidden, that the nation 
might be a self-sufficient economic unit; the king was 
invested with the absolute authority of a father, and 
with the duties of a father. The cohesion of such a 
state is simply the cohesion of the family on a larger 
scale, though a common religion and a common authority 
have more important functions. Military power does 
not make a nation, but the authority which can enforce 
obedience and develop the habit of submission, pertains 
to the very essence of the state. Eeligion, especially 
in the form of ancestor-worship, performed a very im¬ 
portant service, both in developing the habit of obedience, 
and by enforcing with supernatural sanctions all the 
customs of the past. Such a tribal state defended its 
citizens against attack from outside; its military power 
guaranteed safety from human enemies, and by its 
religious ceremonies it retained the favour of the gods. 
To its internal functions no exact limit can be set. 
Theoretically it might exercise the authority of a father 
over the lives and possessions of its subjects; practically 
the citizen has no protection against state-interference 
except the habit of non-interference that must charac-' 
terise any state which seeks permanence by retaining 
the loyalty of its subjects. The tribal state may be 
governed by a king or by some sort of council, but 
whatever the form of government, tlie state is largely 
built up on the lines of the family, its authority can 
be compared to the authtrity of the father (when the 
family is organised on this basis), and its functions are 
the functions of a larger family. 


i6o 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


The city-state of the Greeks and Eomans is the out¬ 
come of this early tribal state, and shows the form 

3 The City assumes Oil a high plane of civilisa- 

state of the tion. The cohesion of the state is due to 
Greeks and bonds of the same character as before. Life 
Eomans. same locality does, indeed, accomplish 

more to unite men as society becomes more stable, but 
the ties of blood are still strong, and the fiction of 
relationship often lends its sanction to ties that had 
another origin; moreover, a state-religion is still a bond 
of political union. The true guarantee of permanence, 
the real unity of the state, consists in the highly- 
developed life of the people. No longer is this limited 
to a few customs which differ slightly from the customs 
of a neighbouring tribe; all that makes life worth living 
finds its expression in the common life and culture of 
the group. The city - state performs the functions of 
defence against attack of man, and against the wrath 
of the divinities; while, as an enlarged family, it may 
direct all the common life of its members. The functions 
of the developed city-state differ from those of the 
earlier tribe generally in the greater regularity and 
permanence which characterise them, and the most im¬ 
portant change in detail is the administration of justice 
which the civilised state is gradually assuming. What¬ 
ever be the particular form of government, wdiether it 
be despotic, or aristocratic, or democratic in the old 
sense of the word, it is really government by a class; 
and it depends on a certain balance of power between 
the different classes in society. King or council governs 
all classes through the class that is strongest, or that 
is in the best position to control. 

The third type of state to become prominent in the 

4 The political development of the Indo-European 
Feudal State, ^^oes was the feudal monarchy. Here personal 

allegiance takes precedence over the other fac¬ 
tors which bind society together, and an elaborate system 


THE STATE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


i6i 


of personal rights and duties constitutes the very frame¬ 
work of the state. It is no longer a larger family; 
it is rather an army, and government is a military 
institution, though blood and locality partly determine 
the composition of the army. The functions of the 
feudal state are, first, defence—each chieftain, small or 
great, defends his subordinates from attack, and each 
dependent can be summoned to aid his superior in 
battle ; secondly, the administration of justice—each 
chieftain enforces law and custom among his dependents, 
and brings his own wrongs before his superior for judg¬ 
ment; thirdly, the direction of affairs, many of which 
to-day would be called private, for economic production 
and distribution are conducted largely along feudal lines, 
and economic activity is, in large measure, controlled 
from above. The form of the feudal state is peculiar, 
in that it has tlie semblance of being organised from 
above. According to this ideal the king owns the whole 
state, nobles receive their fiefs at his hand, and distribute 
their lands among their subordinates, while themselves 
retaining the titles. Formerly men lived for the state; 
now they are called on to live for the king in whom 
the state has been concentrated. Moreover, consent to 
feudal authority is no longer due to inbred custom alone; 
it certainly is not the free consent of reason; it is the 
consent of want, for the individual absolutely cannot live 
except in the place where he finds himself. 

The feudal type of government was never realised 
long at a time, but the ideas which it engendered have 
borne fruit in the aristocratic monarchies 
which have succeeded the old feudal states. 
Patriotism has often meant loyalty to the 
king rather than loyalty to the state ; 
monarchs still continued to treat the state 
as their private property, and every concession and 
limitation of their authority has been secured with 
difficulty. Gradual!}’ the cohesion of the state has 
M 


5. The 
Limited 
Monarchy 
and 

Democracy. 


i 62 introduction TO SOCIOLOGY. 

come to depend more and more on the highly-developed 
and differentiated common life, of which it is the political 
expression; many and various ties bind men together, 
and patriotism is devotion to the state which protects 
men in the interests which make np their very life. 
The question as to the proper functions of government 
to-day requires separate consideration; but it is easy 
to see that trade has been throwing off the yoke of 
political control, that government has but little to do 
with social relations, and that the intellectual, artistic, 
and religious life of every people is rapidly freeing itself 
from political influence and support. To-day, as in 
earlier times, governments have various forms, depending 
largely on their historic precedents; but the principle on 
which the state rests is about the same in all. The 
sovereignty of the people is the real governing power, 
different as may be the form of its expression. The 
king is the minister of the people, not a superior being 
clothed with divine rights; and Parliament is forced to 
register the will of the peo23le, or its character is changed 
until it does. The will of the people is expressed by 
means of representatives elected for the purpose, and 
responsible to the body which has delegated power to 
them. By this device the government is brought into 
closest relations with a large body of people; it is 
theoretically possible for the people to choose men far 
wiser than the average to administer affairs of state, 
and, at the same time, each individual is encouraged to 
defend his own liberty. 

Having thus outlined some of the typical forms of the 
early state, we may now ask, What is the essential 
B. Relation nature of the state? With reference to this 
of law to question, we get much light from the study 
the State. organised body of rules 

which are enforced by the state. So intimate is the 
connection between the nature of a body of laws and 
the nature of the state which enforces these laws, that 


THE STATE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITY, 163 

it is possible to argue safely from the one to the 
other. 

In earliest times, the basis of law is to be found in 
custom and religion. To make a law would be an act 
Early Law impossible as it was sacrilegious. The 
based on ideas of justice which the state enforces are 
Custom and to be found in an elaborate body of custom, 
e igion. which absolute validity is assigned. Priests 
often have the duty of preserving the knowledge of this 
custom, and the rules of procedure which it enjoins are 
frequently religious in their nature ; but the priest has 
no recognised power to make any change in them. The 
only principle of growth which we can discover lies in 
the power of king (or judiciary body) to decide new 
cases, provided he follows the established rules of pro¬ 
cedure. By means of these special cases the range of 
customary law might be widely extended, and it was so 
extended when the people felt the need of a more com¬ 
plete law. Law rested on the fact that a people assigned 
authority to certain principles of action. 

With the development of higher stages of civilisation, 
this reverence for ^ustom did not entirely disappear, 
_ although the need of a more extended law was 

Extended by Constantly felt. Until comparatively modern 
the Courts times, this need was largely met by the courts. 

The adjudication of particular cases continued 
to be the source of large additions to what 
was generally recognised as law or “right,” and this 
process gradually assumed two forms. First, cases 
decided as coming under previously existing law fre¬ 
quently extended the scope of that law. And, secondly, 
new cases, of which the court was ready to take cog¬ 
nisance, might lead to a wide extension of the actual 
law of a people. The decisions of the Eoman Praetor, 
together with the edicts announcing the principles which 
would govern these decisions, and the English Courts 
of Chancery, are the most striking examples of this kind 


in Later 
Times. 


164 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


of law-making. In both these forms, a law is evidently 
a rule which the people recognise as binding, because 
their courts enforce it. 

In the modern state, almost all law has its source in 
legislative bodies formed for the purpose of pronouncing 
Law-making l^ws. Such bodies are said to have legal 
by sovereignty, i.e., they have the power to make 
Legislatures, ^he judge and the lawyer are 

bound to recognise as valid (except where a constitu¬ 
tion is contravened). The ease with w’hich a law seems 
to be “made” to-day, gives rise to the idea that law 
may really be manufactured without limit; but a deeper 
study shows that the real foundation of law is still the 
will of the people. Unless public opinion stands behind 
a law, transgressors will not be brought before the courts, 
and even the courts themselves will be lax to adminster 
the law. And when the will of the people demands a 
new law to express a definitely formed opinion, no body 
of legislators can permanently stand in its way. The 
legislator is really the formulator of law, not its maker; 
legal sovereignty, the power to make valid laws, rests 
with the legislature; but the real sovereignty is the will 
of the people, and no law continues to be effective unless 
the people recognise it as law, and consent to obey it as 
law. It is necessary to remember, however, that the 
“ will of the people ” does not mean a momentary 
majority, and perhaps not a nriajority at all, nor is it 
any capricious wish. Traditions of the past are a most 
potent factor in determining it ; temperament and 
education help to mould it; the attitude of neighbouring 
states and the desire for the future prosperity of one’s 
own state furnish additional motives; and the people 
which has no common life sufficiently developed to 
produce a common will, can have no laws, for there is 
no basis for the state. 

Modern political science finds the real basis of the 
state’s authority, as well as the basis of the authority 


THE STATE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


165 

of law, in the will of the people. When a people con- 
Sovereignty, State, the State has thereby 

and the the right -to exercise authority; and, inasmuch 
Conception of as the real will of the people is formed 
gradually, and changes but slowly, the state 
has a comparatively stable foundation. The people, not 
a majority within a given territory, but the people as 
a definite society, are the basis of the state; the state 
is simply the organ of society to accomplish certain 
ends, and it is distinguished from other social organs 
by the fact that it is the embodiment of social authority 
or sovereignty. The state may be defined as a society 
exercising authority over its members ; compared with 
the autliority of other social institutions, the authority 
of the state is final; and, for this reason, two states, as 
states, cannot exist in the same territory. 

The question as to the proper functions of the state 
and the limits to state activity, has been much discussed 
C The Func- ^^le past century. The cry for liberty 

tions of the has been a potent force in limiting the sphere 
Modern of government; believers in the commune as 
state. political unit, or in “state’s rights,” have 

resisted any increase of activity on the part of the 
central government; individualists in philosophy and the 
liberal school of political economists, have resented any 
interference by the state in the sphere of thought and the 
sphere of industry. But on the other hand, the less- 
favoured classes find some nations ready to lend them 
special aid, and they ask this aid of all; legislatures seem 
to be omnipotent, so they are asked to make the world 
over; all realise the solidarity of the nation as never 
before, and if all have a common interest, why should 
not the government seek to further that interest in any 
way at its command ? The commonly accepted idea of 
the state affords a general principle which throws light 
on this question, although it is not sufficient in itself 
to decide particular cases. The state, as we have seen, 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


166 

is a society exercising authority over its members, and 
having final authority within a given territory. It is 
evident that forms of activity which demand the power 
of the whole society for their realisation, or, again, which 
require general rules enforced on all classes alike, come 
within the proper sphere of the state. On the other 
hand, an almost universal experience has shown that 
where freedom of initiative is required, political machinery 
is likely to stand in the way of success. 

The forms of state activity undertaken by the modern 
European state, may be classified under three heads: 
Three Forms (®) activity with reference to other states, 
of state guaranteeing protection from external attack . 
Activity. or interference, (2>) activity with reference to 
its citizens, guaranteeing them security and liberty, and 
(c) modification of other forms of social activity. Under 
the last heading comes the interference of the state in 
the sphere of economic life, and in the sphere of intellec¬ 
tual life, the propriety of which is being so generally 
discussed to-day. ^ 

The first necessity of a state is the power to assert a 
place for itself among its neighbours. The case of some 
I Diplo- smaller European States {e.g. Belgium) 

matic and shows that this power is not necessarily 
Military military force alone, yet ordinarily the state 
Activity. be able to defend its territory by 

military means. In this manner, the nation is isolated 
from other nations so far as it may think desirable, 
and its peculiar institutions have an opportunity for 
free development. The first condition of peace and 
security is this protection from external attack. The 
sphere of convention between different states has been 

^ This classification corresponds roughly Avith the three ends of State 
activity proposed by von Holtzendorfi' (Principien der Politik, chapters 
vii., ix., and x.) namely, Machtzweck, Rechtzweck, and gesellschnftliche 
Cultiirzweck, although the definition of each differs radically from his. It 
seems to me quite unnecessary to discuss the ultimate ends of the State 
proposed by Bluntschli and Burgess. 


THE STATE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 167 

widely extended in modern times, so that a state to-day 
lequires a wise diplomatic service in addition to mere 
military power, if it is to maintain its position with 
leference to other states. By this means states enter 
into union with each other for purposes of common 
advantage, and each state finds larger sphere for the 
exercise of its own individuality. So long as different 
states preserve their distinct national life, this two¬ 
fold form of activity will continue; and in spite of 
all that is justly urged against the great armaments 
of Europe, there can be no question that the necessity 
of maintaining its position does very much to develop 
the resources and the common life of each nation. 

The second fundamental form of political activity 
concerns the relation of citizens to each other and to the 

II The state guarantee security and 

punishes liberty to each citizen and to protect the state 
Crimes and from the internal danger of vice and crime, 
defends the Evidently the sphere of law is two-fold; 
g acts which endanger the common life of the 
state are punished by the state, and also the 
individual is protected in the exercise of certain rights 
defined by the state. The punishment of crime clearly 
belongs to the state, for it requires the use of an authority 
which reaches to all parts of society. It is true that 
when the state has not protected men from crime, they 
have devised a way to protect themselves; the system of 
family blood-vengeance afforded a rude means of protect¬ 
ing life in early times, and the trade societies of Elanders 
and Italy are an example of the same ends more perfectly 
secured in mediaeval periods of anarchy. But the punish¬ 
ment of crime is not likely to pass ,from the hands of the 
developed state, both because the state alone is really 
fitted to deal with crime, and because crime endangers 
the common life which finds expression in the state. 
Accordingly we find that the state not only provides 
machinery for determining justice and punishing the 


i68 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


convicted criminal, but it also establishes an elaborate 
police system to secure the criminal, and in the person of 
its own attorneys, it conducts the case against him. This 
has proved to be the only effective means of dealing with 
those who utterly refuse to regard the most fundamental 
rules of common life. 

The attempt has been made to limit the functions of 
the state to this single form of activity, viz., care for 
The Preven- internal safety, but this principle does not 
tion of furnish the simple means desired for setting a 
Crime. right limit to governmental activity. Care for 
internal safety demands something more than the punish¬ 
ment of offences already committed; many evils may be 
prevented by wise precautions, and more still would be 
prevented if the state could develop tlie moral character 
of its citizens to a higher stage. ^ But the modern state 
only finds it wise to interfere with the moral training of 
individuals, in the case of young persons who have already 
been convicted of crime; and although it regulates such 
matters as the manufacture and use of dynamite, the ex¬ 
tension of police supervision is not unreasonably objected 
to by opponents of a paternal government. 

Besides punishing crime, the modern state protects its 
citizens in the exercise of certain well-defined rights. It 
enforces contracts when properly made; it 
affords damages for accidents and for other 
injuries; it permits the formation of corporate 
bodies for business purposes, and defines the 
rights and duties of these societies; it may 
even lend its stamp as a guarantee that goods 
come up to a particular standard of excellence, thus 
protecting individuals against fraud. All these various 
forms of activity may be carried on by private associa¬ 
tions, and some of them seem to be passing out of the 
hands of the government; but the government has an 
advantage over other forms of association, in that it can 
^ W. v. Humboldt; Gesam. IVerke^ VII. p. 50 


The State 
Protects 
Citizens in 
the exercise 
of Civil 
Eights. 


THE STATE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 169 


establish universally binding rules, and can act through 
courts which command universal respect. In this 
manner the citizen finds through the state security of life 
and property, and liberty in the exercise of his rights. 
To some schools of thought, government has seemed to 
stand in the way of the liberty proper to man, but it has 
become very clear that true liberty is a different thing 
from the right to act without reference to any other man. 
A government in process of formation may seem to curtail 
individual freedom; but the right to be protected from 
the incursions of other states, the right to be protected 
against crime and against unjust interference on the part 
of any man, the right to all the economic, social, and 
intellectual privileges of civilised society—these are civil 
rights guaranteed by the state. And as the sovereign 
state passes more and more into the hands of the people, 
as the individual has been secured against interference in 


HI. The 
State in 
relation to 
Other Modes 
of Social 
Activity. 


wider and wider spheres of action, the history of develop¬ 
ing government has been the history of growing liberty. 

Even if the state does not go beyond the most limited 
sphere of activity, it renders very important service to all 
the other modes of social activity. But the 
modern state does, as a matter of fact, inter¬ 
fere directly to favour industry and even to 
carry on some forms of industry ; the separa¬ 
tion of state and church is by no means 
universal; and the control of education has 
passed, to a considerable degree, into the hands of 
the state. If the present tendency toward socialistic 
measures should continue, direct care for the welfare 
of each citizen would come to be the most important 
sphere of state-activity. 

1 The State economic life of society is fundamental, 

and and common political life is not likely to arise 

Economic except where common economic interests bind 
Activity. together, (chap. vi. p. 113.) But it is 

equally clear that industry demands the protection of 


170 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


the state. Peace and security are the necessary con¬ 
ditions of industrial development; and if the state does 
not provide these, industrial associations must perform 
as best they may the proper function of the state, or their 
existence is constantly threatened. Gradually the state 
has assumed the important function of defining and 
giving fixity to some economic institutions. The state 
lias never been an inventor of new ecoi\omic forms, but 
when such forms or institutions have arisen, it has often 
preserved them and given them such definiteness that it 
could protect persons in the use of them. Thus the 
forms of contract grew up in economic intercourse, but 
tlie state has defined a legal contract, and when the 
contracting parties have complied with the law, it under¬ 
takes to enforce the contract. Money was used long 
before the state coined gold or stamped paper, but it 
was soon found convenient to have the degree of fineness 
and the weight of a piece of gold authoritatively deter¬ 
mined, and this the state undertook to do at an early 
date. In similar manner the state has benefited com¬ 
merce by giving a definiteness and sanction to banking 
institutions; in fact, it guards the rights of individual 
persons and the welfare of the community, by defining 
the manner in which any sort of corporation may be 
formed, and the legal rights and responsibilities of such 
a corporation. The state has invented none of these 
things, but it has aided economic activity by giving 
definite authoritative form to various economic insti¬ 
tutions. 

It is an open question how far the state should di¬ 
rectly interfere with economic matters. Quite generally 
Direct Inter- assumes the power to protect inventors by 
ference with granting them patents ; and, in many countries. 
Industry by it uses its power of taxation to aid some forms 
the State. industry, and even to hinder other forms, 

which it regards as injurious. All modern states under¬ 
take the transmission of mail matter, and keep important 


THE STATE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


171 


roadways in order; many states go farther, and control 
the railways and the telegraph. “Public works” im¬ 
portant for the general welfare, such as the dredging of 
harbours, surveys of land, and charts of the shore, are 
generally undertaken by the state. And, to-day, the 
state is asked to go farther still, and to become an 
employer of labour in numerous forms of industry. It 
is generally agreed that the state is society as exercising 
final authority, and making rules which bind all classes 
alike. The limits of direct state activity in the economic 
sphere will be determined in the light of this principle; 
where final authority and universal rules are more advan¬ 
tageous than freedom of individual initiative, the state 
should assume control. Evidently the line will be drawn 
differently in different localities, and in different ages. 

In its relation to social institutions, particularly to the 
family, the state has much the same office as in relation 
2 . The state to economic institutions. The state has grown 
and the up along with the family, and has always 
Family. recognised its validity. In modern times, by 
making marriage a civil as well as a religious institution, 
it has given the family a definite status before the law. 
At the same time, it has defined the legal rights and 
duties of the members of the family, and thus has helped 
to make the relations in the family more definite and 
more permanent. At times the state has given its sanc¬ 
tion to other social institutions, and, in a measure, it still 
recognises rank in some countries. These institutions are 
not invented by the state, but the state may define them 
and give them permanent form. 

The relation of the state to the intellectual 


3 . The state 
and Higher 
Social 
Activities, 
(a) Educa¬ 
tion. 


life of society has varied greatly at different 
times. Undoubtedly the state derives some 
advantage from uniformity of language, opinion, 
and belief; and in the effort to secure this, 
the liberty of the press has been curtailed. 


universities have been brought under a dominant central 


172 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


influence, as in France, and schools have been made 
instruments for securing intellectual uniformity, as 
in Alsace-Lorraine. The obstacles which any forcible 
effort for uniformity places in the w^ay of a vigorous and 
growing intellectual life are so effective, that modern 
governments have been less and less inclined to interfere 
with the free expression of thought. Even the uni¬ 
versities under direct government control have secured 
a large degree of freedom. Along with this increase in 
intellectual liberty, another force has been at work 
impelling governments to bring the matter of education 
under more direct supervision. The modern state is 
democratic, and even as a matter of self-defence it is 
really compelled to educate its voters. In spite of many 
disadvantages, compulsory education, controlled by the 
state, has come to be the rule, and every child is com¬ 
pelled to do a certain amount of school-work. 

It is clear again that it is of the utmost importance 
to the modern state to have citizens of strong moral 
(6) The state character. The presence of the morally weak 
and Moral and the morally depraved is a constant menace 
to the state’s existence. But moral character 
is not to be created by force, and any interference with 
morals on the part of authority is likely to sap the 
springs of character without accomplishing any but a 
temporary success. The moral and religious state of a 
Savonarola or a Calvin shows the utter futility of the 
effort to make men moral. The modern state has found it 
possible to remove some temptations to vice by forbidding 
the circulation of impure literature, by limiting the sale 
of intoxicating liquors, and (in America) by forbidding 
organisations which encourage gambling. More than this 
can hardly be accomplished by the use of authority, i.e. 
by the state. 

The question of the relation of state and church has 
never been settled. Ever since the political and the 
religious organisations of society became distinct in form, 


THE STATE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITY. 


173 


they have retained a close connection, and in European 
(c) The state countries this connection still continues. It 
and the is urged in its favour that if religious beliefs 
Church. true, they are a most important concern 

of the state, that the nation should fittingly appear 
before God in a national church, that the religious side 
of life cannot be so separated from the rest of life as to 
remove it entirely from the proper sphere of govern¬ 
ment. On the other hand it is evident that there can be 
but one final authority in external matters, that the use 
of authority in matters of religion helps to make religion 
formal and perfunctory, that the religious liberty for 
which so many have died, is not lightly to be thrown 
away. 

The question as to the proper limits of government 
activity is one of the most important questions of the 

Conclusion question as to the proper 

extent of external authority which was'at stake 
in the formation of the Protestant church, and in the war 
for the independence of the American colonies, as in so 
many contests before and since. The problem belongs 
to practical politics, but it receives more definite form 
from the general consent as to what the state is, viz., the 
organ of final authority, controlling all individuals within 
its territory. 


CHAPTEE X. 


THE INDIVIDUAL FROM THE STANDPOINT OF SOCIOLOGY. 


Theories of social organisation have taken very different 
views of the units out of which society is composed, and 
these differences have been reflected in the 
opinions of social reformers. Eoughly speaking, 
viduai versus theoretical and practical thinkers are divided 
the Welfare into two opposing caiiips on the question 
Group whether the individual or the social group is 
, the true unit for the sake of which society 
exists. This contest between the individualists and the 
socialists, as they would term themselves, is not limited 
to economic and political relations, but runs through the 
whole field of social activities. Moreover, the problem is 
twofold, although the two parts are intimately related. 
On the one hand is the question of fact, whether from 
the scientific standpoint the individual or the group is the 
bearer of culture and the true unit of society; on the 
other hand is the question of worth, whether the indi¬ 
vidual or the social whole has ultimate value, and which 
should be developed at the expense of the other in case 
the two come into conflict. 

This conflict has received most emphasis in the economic 
sphere. On the one hand is the individualism of the 
This Conflict Orthodox political economy; the unit of 
in the differ- economic activity is the economic man, ruled 
ent Spheres py pjg (desire for wealth; the competition of 
' the middle of the nineteenth century is exalted 
into a universal law, and the bitter struggle of man with 


174 


THE INDIVIDUAL. 


175 


his neighbour is made the basis of all that is good and all 
that is just; the doctrine of laissez-faire represents not 
only a present truth, but also an ideal, for a strong society 
depends on the strong citizens that are said to be developed 
under this regime. The other party has never been 
entirely unheard. In business no man lives to himself, 
but prosperity or adversity overspreads a whole nation at 
once; confidence is at the basis of successful business 
activity; employer and labourer suffer together; practi¬ 
cally, the claim is made, the social group should intervene 
to protect and encourage industry, for the interest of the 
part is in the advancement of the whole. The theory of 
economic socialism is that the individual is, and should 
be, a fraction of the whole. The same conflict appears 
in the sphere of “social” life in the narrower sense of the 
term. There is the comfortable belief in a sort of natural 
equilibrium, such that each man eventually finds his true 
associates; the belief that men are very different, and 
that the differences in society are but the differences 
which necessarily exist between the men who enter into 
society; the belief that the social world is, and that any 
attempt to make it better by wholesale, will be fraught 
with grave mischief. In opposition to this is the cry of 
the sentimental reformer that one class is “grinding 
another beneath its iron heel,” that the “ rich ” will suffer 
unless they condescend to help the “ poor,” and that the 
“poor” have an inalienable right to the good things of 
this life. With reference to the intellectual and aesthetic 
life, there is the call for the “ education of the masses,” 
and over against it the belief that culture is won, not 
imparted, that the desire for knowledge must be awakened 
in the individual before one can speak of educating him. 
In the moral and religious life there is the ideal of virtue 
and of holiness which applies to the individual; the 
appeal is directed to the individual to choose a right 
course of action, and to develop a right character in 
himself. There is also the ideal of self-sacrifice and love 


176 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


which bids men forget themselves in the service of others. 
Finally, the same antithesis appears in the state. Indi¬ 
vidualism says, Eights belong to those who can win them ; 
property, political rights, political power, fall into the 
hands of those best fitted to use them; the state does 
exist for the man, and ought to. And there is a social¬ 
istic doctrine of fraternity and equality which claims to 
deal with classes rather than with men. Here, as else¬ 
where, the class is reached by neglecting the differences 
of individuals; if individuals are by nature alike and 
equal, it should be the function of the state to realise 
this likeness and equality in the perverted modern 
world. 

Adherents of both these views are accustomed to 
appeal to history in support of their opinions. Christian 
The Socialists of the chair in Ger- 

of History many refer to early Hebrew institutions as 
as to this embodying their ideas; de Laveleye shows how 
Antithesis, have strayed from the type of life 

found in the early Aryan village communities. The 
individualist responds by quoting Sir Henry Maine’s law, 
from status to contract,” with all the evidence that can 
be brought forward in its favour. But if one is ready to 
lay aside the spectacles of either party, two truths stand 
out with considerable clearness, (i) The earliest achieve¬ 
ment of the human race was the development of social 
groups. By the development of race ties, of common 
interests, and of centres of authority, men who had been 
separate animals became united in human groups. The 
physical subjugation of the individual to the power of 
the group was, of course, most apparent when the 
patriarchal family, the despotic state, and the despotic 
religious community seemed to obliterate the separateness 
of men. Yet the process of the subordination of man’s 
physical self to the life of the community did not stop 
here; the great eastern despotisms are not the truest 
examples of such subordination. The character of the 


THE INDIVIDUAL. 


177 


relation has indeed changed—it has been incorporated 
more and more in the inner life of the individual; but 
men have never before been so dependent on society as 
they are to-day. (2) History is, at the same time, the 
record of the growing importance of the members of 
society, until to-day all the stress is laid on the individual 
as the intellectual and the moral element of society. 
This process has been far from regular, but it has grown 
clearer with each advance in civilisation. Beyond a 
question, the individual’s psychical life has never had 
such stimulus to broad and full development as it has 
to-day. ihese tw'o truths explain the ease with which 
both the so-called individualist and the socialist find in 
history the proof that their respective opinions are correct. 
At the same time they show that the antithesis between 
the two positions is falsely drawn. 

The preceding chapters have indicated with clearness, 
I hope, the solution of this question from the standpoint 
The Group of ^ scientific sociology. Culture, civilisation, 
as a Social are primarily the property of the social group. 

Language and science develop with the social 
mind, and exist in this mind. Political life is the life 
of the nation; the moral code—and the enforcement of 
if,—is a possession of the social mind and a mode of 
its activity. Nor are the differences of psychical life 
primarily differences of individuals, but rather differences 
characterising one class and another. When changes 
occur—wLen two types of culture are thrown in contact 
with each other, and gradually fused into a new whole— 
it is no mere figure of speech which expresses this as the 
contact of two groups; it is no conflict between indi¬ 
viduals, nor is the result a change in what is peculiar to 
the individual, but only in the life of the group in which 
they are included. Sociology teaches us that the group 
is the true unit of social life. 

This account of the position of the social group is but 
the half of what sociology has to say upon this question. 

N 


178 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 

Sociology does not annihilate the individual; rather it 
The Place shows that individuality is something more 
of the than physical separateness. As a member of 
Individual society man develops a psychical personality, 
in Society. science of society has to study man 

as a person. The great difficulty with socialism, as 
ordinarily stated, and, indeed, with the “social organ¬ 
ism” theory, is that it neglects this most important 
side of sociology. There is a social mind, but the 
social brain is a figment of the imagination; the in¬ 
dividual is the centre of consciousness, and the centre 
of will. The individual’s needs and emotions are the 
stimuli to social activity; through his mind the social 
ideals become active and effective; the norms of ethics 
and of logic are social rules foi the man’s thought 
and action. The psychical life of the class is not 
developed apart from the psychical life of the mem¬ 
bers of the class—it is the same thing regarded from 
two standpoints. There can be no strong and well- 
developed society made up of weak men, for the society 
is nothing but the psychical life of its members. The 
individual is the centre of activity: this means that all 
modifications of social activity are operative through the 
individual, that progress is due to influences acting on 
the individual, and retrogression commences as soon as 
the individual ceases to feel the influence of higher 
motives and impulses. Even when a reform pretends 
to deal with whole classes at a time, it only accomplishes 
this by bringing influences to bear at once on all the 
particular members of these classes. The individual is 
the centre of consciousness : this means that all intellectual 
advance takes place through personal leaders. Truth is 
a social possession, but new truth comes through indi¬ 
vidual leaders of thought; ideals affect all the members 
of a class, but it is the moral or religious leader who has 
the insight to see the needs of his age, and the way those 
needs may be met. 



THE INDIVIDUAL. 


179 


The Anti¬ 
thesis be¬ 
tween the 
Individual 
and the 
Group is 
False. 


The study of sociology, as well as the study of history, 
suggest that the antithesis between the group and the 
individual is but partial, and has been falsely 
stated. Both lines of study make it evident 
that personality and dependence on a personal 
environment develop together -pari passu —in 
other words, that they are one and the same 
thing essentially. The individualistic and the 
socialistic theories are alike false, because both 
are built upon a false antithesis. The great truth which 
needs to be emphasised to-day is the fact that personality 
is the product of social life, and cannot exist apart from 
social life; the fact that each advance in psychical life 
and psychical power means a new dependence on one’s 
personal environment. Life as a man, the very power to 
be an individual person, lies in the relation to this 
personal environment. As to the question of fact, both 
the individual and the group are social units, although 
the relations of each to the larger whole are so different 
that they are not in any sense homogeneous units. As 
to the question of worth, neither group nor individual has 
worth by itself (strictly speaking, neither exists by itself); 
it is the individual in society, the person or the group as 
the bearer of this psychical life, to which this concept 
of worth may properly be applied.^ 

The thought that psychical power lies in a developed 
psychical relationship with a personal environment, 
demands some farther illustration. Perhaps 
the most familiar example of this truth is to 
be found in the relation of the individual to 
the state. The despot may demand anything 
of his subject (in theory); in practice he 
receives little from him, and at most all he does for the 
subject is to protect him from the incursions of other 
nations. The development of the state has been a story 
of increasing dependence of the citizen on the state for 
^ Cf. T. H. Green, Prolegomena to Ethics, p. 200, p. 351. 


Psychical 
Power 
involves 
Dependence 
on Society. 


i8o 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


protection of life and of those habits of life which one 
may choose without interfering with the rights of others, 
for the protection of property, and of all the other insti¬ 
tutions of modern life. This growing dependence has 
meant a liberty constantly larger, for political liberty is 
not typified by the hermit’s life, but rather by the power 
to act out one’s purposes in concert with others. Liberty 
under authority is a truism, but its truth has too often 
been forgotten. True political freedom is the highest 
type of political dependence. 

In a similar way every institution means a new 
dependence of the individual upon society. Take for 
Institutions example the institution of money. A cannot 
as a Source expect B to accept the proper amount of his 
of Power. wheat in payment for the manufactured goods 
that A needs; B wants tokens with stamps of the Govern¬ 
ment on them to the effect that they are legal tender, and 
nothing else. Both A and B depend on society for a 
particular medium of exchange. Farther, there are 
special institutions wLich deal in this special ware of 
money; and those who desire can depend on the banks to 
handle much of this commodity in their behalf. Con¬ 
nected with them are still other institutions on which the 
individual is obliged to depend, to the rules of which he 
is obliged to conform, if he is to engage in business in 
modern society. Each of these complex institutions arose 
and exists to-day, because the individual has found he has 
greater power when he depends on them. He depends 
on society for money, it may increase the range of busi¬ 
ness he controls a thousandfold; he learns to depend on 
the banks, space no longer hinders him from paying for 
goods in Berlin as easily as in Hew York, and time no 
longer obliges him to wait till he can himself accumulate 
capital for his increasing business. The individual’s 
power increases as he learus to depend more completely 
on more perfect institutions. 


THE INDIVIDUAL, 


i8i 


This same principle, that power lies in a true subjection 
to society, lies at the basis of much of what we call 
Education education. The school brings the child’s mind 
Proceeds into sympathy with the civilisation of his age, 
on this subordinates it to the norms of this civili- 

Prmcipie. gg^j^ion. In language, in natural science, in 
mathematics, it bids the child accept the habits and 
views of this our nineteenth century, because it is 
through this living connection with the psychical world 
in which he lives that he may expect power, and by 
no other-- course can he expect it. Psychical life is 
developed by developing dependence on the psychical 
environment. 

The same error, which has appeared in the antithesis 
of the individual and the group, appears also in the 
antithesis between egoism and altruism, which 
recent writers have emphasised until it is 
false. A dilemma is proposed : Men are 
either seeking their own good, or the good of some one 
else, and on this basis men are parcelled out more or 
less fortuitously into two opposing groups. That this 
is pure abstraction is evident at a glance, for no one can 
entirely forget other people in his so-called egoism, nor 
does the altruist live without the least reference to 
himself. In business, in political or in intellectual 
pursuits, men are living the life that is consonant with 
their nature and environment. They are governed, not by 
simple self-interest (if there be any such thing), but by 
the varied interests which have entered into their lives 
through a contact with various types of society. There 
is a sort of egoism in the child or in the savage who 
yields to each animal passion, because as yet no real 
humanity has been developed in him; and that man 
may be called an egoist, whose semi-human desires have 
been made keener and stronger by contact with social 
life, while he himself has not taken up that truly 
human life into himself. In like manner there is an 


i 82 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


altruism of the child or savage—or animal—whose action 
is guided by a social im^pulse to aid his companion as 
easily as by appetite or passion; and there is an altruism 
of the man whose sympathy with others has been 
developed in society rather at the expense of the full 
personality which is his right and his duty as a member 
of society. Still, it is entirely false to regard egoism and 
altruism as opposed ethical ideals. What the philosopher 
means by altruism as an ideal is ordinarily just that 
development of truly human life, of personality, in the 
man which distinguishes the psychical man from the 
animal man. The ideal is really the development of 
personality and not self-negation. 

While the primary object of sociological study is the 
life of the social group, it is necessary, even in order to 
attain this end, to form a clear conception 
the Concrete individual and his place in society. 

Expression of To the question What is a person?' the first 
^e Group- simplest answer from this standpoint is 

that the individual person is the concrete 
expression of the life of the group. The group is the 
bearer of culture, but this is not the culture of the group; 
it is the men, members of the group, to whom this culture 
applies. So far is this the case that in attempting to 
analyse the social mind, the only practical course has 
been to follow the general divisions of the psychology 
of the individual mind. The person is the concrete 
expression of this psychical life. The name does not 
apply to the animal man. Animals are separate. A man 
as he develops psychical life in society becomes a person. 
Truth becomes a power controlling his intellectual life; 
righteousness is the norm of an incipient moral life; he 
receives eyes to behold the beautiful. Still a part of 
nature, it is none the less true to say that he rises above 
nature and the natural; he becomes lord of nature as he 
becomes lord of himself. He becomes a person, and the 
conception of worth arises to express the difference 


THE INDIVIDUAL. 


183 


between this new phenomenon and the rest of nature. 
This psychical life is a process, not a stationary fact; it 
is ever growing in power and in complexity, so personality 
stands out with increasing clearness against the rest of 
nature, and becomes a more and more precious possession, 
as it expresses a higher psychical life. 

The imperfection of this statement of the case is evident 
at a glance, and yet it is about all that sociology has had 
The Element ^ay with reference to the individual person, 
of Individu- It is very well to glorify personality, and the 
ality in ^ worth of personality ; but, one cannot help 
asking, does this worth really lie in sharing 
the life of other people, and in nothing else ? Persons 
are first individuals, and we are wont to prize rather 
highly this difference from everybody else. In reality 
this is only an antithesis between partial knowledge as to 
the meaning of dependence on society, and a partially 
developed feeling of the value of individuality: a clue to 
its solution is at hand in the fact that the individual is a 
member of numerous social groups. He never expresses 
the life of any single group perfectly, for the very reason 
that he is more than a member of this group. Pride in 
being different from other people is a very empty matter 
indeed, unless this difference consists in sharing some 
element of psychical life not so fully shared by ones 
companions. Differentiated personalities are the counter¬ 
part of differentiated society; each presupposes the other, 
for they are but two sides of the same thing. 

The simplest evidence in favour of this accoimt of 
individual personality is to be found in the familiar fact 
that, as a matter of history, the differentiation 
ality of ' individuals does keep pace with the growing 
Persons and complexity of Social life. When the scientific 
Complexity imagination constructs out of the materials at 
of Society, ^ picture of the earliest social group it 

is obliged to think of this group as theoretically homo¬ 
geneous. If it is really a human group, a degree of 


i 84 introduction TO SOCIOLOGY. 

psychical life is present; this, however, is shared by all, 
and the only difference between these incipient persons 
will be at bottom a physical difference. The history of 
progress is a story of differentiation of function, and 
corresponding differentiation of social groups. The 
subjugation of a second group introduces a difference 
of rank ; the separation between the inner family and 
the larger family or tribe is the germ of i twofold 
position of each individual in society. As soon as 
church and state, religious and political life are in any 
degree distinct, another mode of activity becomes to this 
degree independent, and the individual may take his 
place in a new set of institutions. So long as each 
social class enters, as a whole, into the new forms of social 
activity, the only perceptible change may be a tightening 
of the bonds which unite this class. Historically, it is 
not always easy to determine the causes which led to the 
overthrow of these classes, nor is the process by any 
means complete. Sometimes the prolonged conflict of 
parties or states that were nearly equal in strength has 
led to a dissolution and recrystallisation of political 
forces; sometimes a new force seems to be introduced 
into the social world, as when new machinery and new 
sources of power were applied to the textile industries a 
century ago, and in the face of this new fact old classes 
give way, and new ones are formed. In one way and 
another the separation of the different modes of social 
activity becomes real, and not merely formal, new insti¬ 
tutions and distinct classes arise in each separate mode, 
and individual persons can no longer be alike, because no 
one occupies exactly the same position as any other in the 
social world. A comparison of different countries shows 
at a glance that members of a given class differ most 
widely where the various modes of social activity are 
most widely differentiated; they differ less and less in 
the lower stages of civilisation now known to us, where 
the modes of activity are not clearly distinguished. 


THE INDIVIDUAL. 


185 

If the phenomenon of individuality is connected with 
the separation of the modes of social activity, it is 
The Com- important to notice the form in which this 
plexity of separation arises. When the separation is 
Society. merely formal, each mode of 

activity gives rise to a distinct class of men who are 
bound together by their common function. The 
groups of men engaged in different functions cross and 
recross; to-day they are rarely identical in any two cases. 
It would be absurd enough to regard such complexity of 
society as an end in itself. Still, it is evident that the 
richness of society must depend in large measure on the 
number of these groups, each the bearer of a distinct 
psychical life, which intersect each other. The inter¬ 
action of these types of culture broadens each one and 
stimulates its development. In this atmosphere indi¬ 
viduality and personality arise together. 

Individual personality corresponds to peculiarity of 
environment. The groups engaged in different functions, 
Individuality cross and recross, cross in the person 

of Environ- of an individual. The same man is in one 
ment. group from the standpoint of production, in 
another from that of consumption. His intellectual, 
religious, political life, differs in important particulars 
from that of any one of his companions in the factory; 
and the first reason is that he belongs to intellectual and 
political groups more or less different from those to which 
they may belong. His present and his past environment 
IS peculiar to himself; his life as a psychical person is even 
more individual than his life as a human animal,because to¬ 
day his psychical environment is so different from that of 
any one else. The individualism of the present generation 
means just this, that no man is bound by the traditions 
of any one class, but that influences from widely diver¬ 
gent sources unite to make him what he is. To-day the 
walls which have separated different civilisations have 
been broken down. There is but one psychical world, 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


186 

and its parts are so intimately connected that the results 
of a very local change are felt in distant parts. Tracing 
out the forces of history, each thinker is led to believe 
that all those forces converge upon himself. In fact this 
is coming to be in large measure true. The widening 
currents of psychical life are bringing each a more 
definite and more distinct influence on persons, and, in 
consequence, individual characteristics are developed with 
increasing clearness. Persons cannot be alike, for no two 
have the same environment. 

In this individual environment individual personality 
is of necessity developed. And yet this is a very 
Xhe defective statement of the case, for environ- 

Individual ment is a biological metaphor, and it intro- 
Personaiity. perhaps as much error as truth into 

the present discussion. Properly speaking, the person is 
not “environed” by psychical life; his very personality 
consists in sharing the psychical life of the community. 
Psychical forces may, indeed, affect him as external 
influences, but the development of personal indhdduality 
is due not so much to such external influences as to 
the forces which reveal themselves through the indi¬ 
vidual as the centre of consciousness and of activity. 
It is the glory of personality that the psychical life 
of the past and of the present finds its true and 
adequate expression through the individual, and may 
be advanced to a higher degree of perfection through 
him. History, it was said truly, finds its goal in each 
person. This does not mean that all men will possess 
the same degree of psychical life and power. Necessarily, 
the life of the past and of the present, in making men 
different, will furnish some with peculiar richness and 
power. Such men can go forward only in the spirit 
of their age, but a unique development of intellectual 
and spiritual power enables them to advance far beyond 
their fellows. Such is individual personality from the 
standpoint of sociology: the psychical life of the ages 


THE INDIVIDUAL. 187 

coming to expression in the individual centre of con¬ 
sciousness and of activity. 

A reference to the share of the individual in social 
progress will make a fitting link between the first and 
The the second parts of the present discussion. 

Individual The art of history-writing has largely dealt 
and Social discussion of the principal characters, to 
Progress. ^yhose influence the rise or downfall of 
nations and their culture are attributed. We seem 
to see progress starting from individuals as centres, 
andr gradually extending through the masses of the 
people. Eeal changes in the life of a people may often 
be overlooked by those wliose interest is absorbed by 
the quarrels of kings; leaders of new movements may 
attract our attention away from the life which produced 
such leaders; the truth of the common position still 
holds good. Progress does proceed from individuals. 
The age produces a better man, and he makes a new 
age. The first part of the process is what has just 
been described in the preceding paragraph. Psychical 
forces of the past and of the present centre upon an in¬ 
dividual, and he is endowed with the qualities of a leader. 
New truth opens to his keener vision; new possibilities 
of life appear in response to his quick sympathies and 
pure ideals. Looking back, we say of him: He lived 
iDefore his time. Such leaders are the statesmen who 
see a broader political life as possible for the state, and 
who have the courage to strive for this ideal. To such 
men are due lasting reforms in religion and morals. 
Progress in science and philosophy lies in their hands. 
They are the true prophets, stoned probably by their 
own age, because they were not content with it, honoured 
by the later ages to which, in spirit, they belonged. 
The other half of progress is from such centres outward. 
The power of a large personality, the truth and the 
sympathy which such a personality brings with it, win 
adherents; new social activities and a new class centre 


i88 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY, 


about such a prophet. Great men cannot be made, but 
their lessons can be taught, and for this second half of 
progress, for education, each age may hold itself re¬ 
sponsible. It is the task of education to communicate, 
not merely the truth as cold fact, but also the psychical 
life in which truth and the ideal are realised. By such 
education the fruits of progress are diffused, and the 
seed is sown for still farther advance in the future. 


CHAPTER XL 


EXTERNAL DESCRIPTION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 

The first work of sociology is to make an analysis of 
social life as it exists to-day, in order to ascertain the 
Part II. factors entering into this life, as well as the 
Social laws governing the relation of these factors; 
Development. effort to accomplish this, our atten¬ 

tion has constantly been turned to the process by which 
these factors and these laws arose. While it has thus 
been impossible to draw any sharp line between the two 
parts of the study of society, the general description of 
social development and the more detailed examination of 
the processes of development have been postponed until 
the discussion of existing social life had been completed. 
The present chapter, which aims to give an external 
account of social development, falls into two divisions : 
(a) the continuity of social development, and (o) the 
unification of social life, attended by differentiation of 
the social elements. 

A. The Continuity of Social Life. 

From the physical standpoint all nature is a single 
multiform process which may be explained in terms of 
Continuity universal laws of mechanics. The present 
from the is the outcome of the past and the source of 
Physical the future, because each present is but a 
standpoint, gtadium arbitrarily fixed in the single process 
which we know as the world. Human life is one part of 


190 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


this process. After this part has been isolated from the 
rest, it still has a physical continuity and a physical 
unity, for each human being is a child and may become a 
parent, and it is only necessary to follow this thread back 
or forward a little way, in order to see that the individual 
is linked with an indefinite number of others.^ But while 
the continuity of social life presupposes this physical 
basis, it is by no means identical with the continuity of 
the human race. It is rather a series of processes, each 
continuous, which may have had various beginnings, and 
which are only gradually being blended into one. Again, 
the physical unity of a race is largely due to a brief 
connection of children with parents, so that most of the 
race become quite independent of each other. The bond 
which unites the members of a society in their common 
life is never severed, and the broken process of changing 
human lives does not prevent the real continuity of social 
life. 

It is an old saying that the king never dies, which 
means nothing more or less than that the nation does not 
_ ., -die. Citizens change, but the state lives on. 

Social Life and the change of those who compose it is the 
and Social very principle of its progressive development. 
Groups. nation’s vigour may degenerate, its culture 

may be absorbed into that of a more powerful people—its 
life receives a new form, but it does not die. After the 
most complete destruction which we can conceive, the 
influence of the state that has been destroyed can still 
be traced in a transformation of the forces that survive. 
It is doubtless part of the mythology which has been 
suggested by the phrase “ social organism,” when we are 
told that the social group is born, grows up, and at length 
decays and dies. But the simple fact that the present is 
the product of the past in the psychical world as in the 
physical world, is the key to an understanding of past 
progress and a basis for judging present movements. 

^ Dumont, Depopulation ct Civilisation, p. 391, sqq. 


DESCRIPTION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 191 

The continuity of social life manifests itself first in the 
continuity of social institutions. Psychical life depends 
Continuity on institutions as a sort of skeleton or frame- 
of institu- work, and it is no more possible to produce 
tions. these all at once, and from outside, than to 

make the body of an animal. They are the product of a 
course of development, and they serve their purpose only 
because they have gradually acquired a considerable 
degree of resistance to change. This framework for the 
higher life to-day is an inheritance; the continuity of 
institutions is the basis of advancement. The fact that 
institutions continue from age to age may be illustrated 
in any sphere of life. In the religious life, the object 
with which one age and people has associated the idea of 
God, continues to be divine for the succeeding age; the 
place where God has appeared is the place where he 
may be expected to appear; sacrifice and other forms of 
cultus owe their sanctity and potency to an accumulated 
reverence—they are the approved ways of seeking the 
gods; the priest is a sacred man, because his predecessors 
have acquired the power or the right to stand between 
the people and their god; religious authority is simply 
the habit of obedience passed on from generation to gene¬ 
ration, till it has entered into the life of the people. The 
economic institutions of property, of money, of banks and 
factories, are the product of the experience of many ages; 
they possess a recognised authority, and they serve their 
purpose as the framework of economic life, because they 
have their sources in the distant past, and can be modified 
only gradually. Language is such an institution that is 
not made, but grows—such are the methods and prin¬ 
ciples of science, and the ideals of the moral life; they 
live on from age to age, and the power which they acquire 
is based on their continuity. The state and the family 
are institutions that have very slowly shaped themselves 
in the life of the race; the authority and the freedom 
which each makes possible are no modern acquisition, but 


192 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


rather the slowly accumulated products of the ages 
brought to bear on the life of to-day. The fact that 
institutions owe their power to this principle of self¬ 
continuation is evident enough; nor is the importance of 
the fact any less clear, for it is only the external side of 
the truth that society is an evolution, that new forms 
of life are produced out of lower forms, that progress is 
out of the past even when it seems to contradict the 
past. 

But the continuity of social life means more than the 
fact that institutions pass on from age to age, and that 
The external forms of life are not subject to 

Generation sudden change. It means also that the life 
of Psychical which uses these forms, and grows upon the 
skeleton of these institutions, is itself in a real 
sense continuous. Psychical life is not a product spon¬ 
taneously arising in each individual, but it is stimulated 
in the individual by personal contact with others in social 
life. In the family, the school, the church, there is 
constantly going on the process of the generation of 
psychical life. The teacher finds his stimulus in the 
never-dying power of masters who may have lived 
centuries ago, and quickens in his pupils the aspirations 
and energies which will make themselves felt when the 
pupils take their place in the world. Not simply the 
forms of life, but the energy—the life which uses these 
forms—has its sources in the far distant past. It in¬ 
creases and degenerates, its currents separate or come 
together, it finds men whose physical nature hinders or 
favours its development, but it is never created ex nihilo. 
Correlative to this last statement is the fact that psy¬ 
chical life does not lose its power. From the present 
standpoint, the law of its progress may almost be described 
as progress by multifold effect, for psychical life is not 
exhausted by generating similar life in others, but it even 
gains in power by this process. The achievements of the 
past in art, in philosophy, in religion, are ever new; age 


DESCRIPTION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT 193 


after age derives its inspiration from them, and the truly 
great productions of the Greeks, the Hebrews, the Eomans, 
gain new mastery over us as we study them with truer 
appreciation. 

The comparison of society with the organism of biology 
has led observers to expect that society will follow a 
Continuity course of development with periodic 

and Change, changes, as does the organism. But society is 
not an organism, and along with the continuity 
of its life there is an absence of rigidity, which is very 
important for its progressive development. If the organ¬ 
ism were able from time to time to substitute an or^an of 


more youthful character for one that had grown old and 
to keep up this process until the whole body were re¬ 
newed, it would escape the necessity of growing old and 
dying; and if it could at the same time preserve the 
experience of the displaced organs for the benefit of the 
more youthful organs that succeeded them, it would em¬ 
body a principle of genuine and almost unlimited progress. 
What, from the very nature of the biological organism, 
is for it impossible, is true of the social organisation. 
In the life of a society new units are substituted for those 
that have grown old, and normally the process goes on 
so gradually that the experience of the past may serve 
as the basis of future development. The young persons 
of each new generation are plastic material which may be 
moulded in harmony with the higher ideals of the former 
age; at the same time they do not hesitate to adopt new 
practices and to champion new ideas, /.e., the shortness of 
human life is the principle of change, which, when com- - 
bined with the principle of continuity, is the basis of 
social progress. The new world of the generation that 
succeeds us is no mere copy of our world, but the living 


continuation of it. 

It has often been customary to limit the process here 
treated, and to interpret it as the gradual conquest of a 
world known as the realm of truth. The continuity 


0 


194 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


of institutions in that case is simply their harmony with 
an external perfect law, and the continuity 

Social ^ gradual embodiment in humanity 

Development ^ i \ 

from the of a knowledge of the truth. Some such 

standpoint position is natural, because human reason 
asserts a kind of independence from 
time and space, and seeks to lend eternal 
universal validity to the knowledge it acquires. While 
this eternal and universal validity may be a natural 
postulate in behalf of our knowledge, the position is 
by no means so clear and unavoidable as it may 
appear at first sight. In fact, each addition to our 
knowledge affects our attitude toward all the things 
known before, so that former knowledge is shifted,. be 
it ever so slightly, from perfect agreement with the 
facts. We do indeed lend a universal validity to 
knowledge, in so far as it is perfect from our stand¬ 
point 5 but the ideal of absolute knowledge is, in reality, 
an ever-advancing goal, and no present fact. When the 
student treats this habit of human reason as an absolute 
fact, and finds the unity of social development only in 
an external world, he has left the field of science for 
that of metaphysics or of faith. The scientific study 
of society finds society to be a developing process, con¬ 
tinuous in its institutions and in its life. 


Note on Social Reform. —It is hardly necessary to call 
attention to the fact that the present discussion has a very im¬ 
portant hearing on the matter of social reform. The doctrine 
here stated should not, of course, he understood as denying the 
reality of revolutions both in public sentiment and in the forms 
of social organisation. It does say that revolutions have their 
roots in the past, that they are the product of a long period of 
preparation, and are not manufactured to order. The con¬ 
sideration of this topic shows the utter absurdity of all 
schemes to introduce a new social order on short notice, and 
by purely external methods. At the same time, it shows that 
the effort to set true and high ideals before the world cannot 
fail to produce its effect in time. 


DESCRIPTION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 195 


B. Increasing Unity and Complexity of Social Life. 

In an Essay entitled “Progress: its Law and Cause/’ Mr. 
Spencer asserts that the essence of progress consists in 
Mr. Spencer’s the transformation of the homogeneous into 
Law of the heterogeneous, and he goes so far as to 
Progress. progress. As the solar 

system was once a homogeneous mass of gaseous matter, 
but now has become a highly complex system of sun 
and planets; as the earth was once a fluid body, homo¬ 
geneous throughout, but has gradually developed a very 
complex crust with its various rocks and their strata, 
its mountains and ocean beds; so, we are told, mankind 
and its civilisation have been passing from a homogeneous 
to a heterogeneous state—and this is progress. The phrase 
“ homogeneous to heterogeneous ” is evidently taken from 
some other sphere than the social, and in its application 
to the higher life of man its meaning is not at all the 
same as when it is used to describe physical nature; 
nevertheless, it is clear that the fact referred to is the 
most striking feature of human progress. To call this 
the “ law ” of social progress is a very loose use of words, 
for it is nothing more than an external description of a 
feature common to all forms of development. To state 
the fact more exactly, as society develops, the forms of 
social activity and the groups engaged in these activities 
become more distinct, and separate simple social groups 
unite into a very complex form of society. The objec¬ 
tions which hold good against Mr. Spencer’s position are 
at once avoided by a more careful statement of the case. 

In the earliest state of society that we can picture to 
ourselves, men lived in small tribes or “hordes,” which 
Physical Side but little to do with each other. These 
of Social tribes were small, because no principle of 
Development, common life had been developed to unite more 
than the few individuals who clung together for mutual 
protection; they were practically independent of each 


196 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


other, for no interest extended beyond one tribe to con¬ 
nect it with another. From a physical standpoint, social 
activity consisted in a struggle with nature, and a 
struggle with similar tribes. In this struggle one tribe 
would go under, and another increase in size until it 
split; the only real change would be introduced when 
one tribe became strong enough and far-sighted enough to 
bring another tribe into permanent subjection to itself. 
The new unit came to include several smaller groups, and 
the original elements acquired different functions in 
relation to the newly-formed whole. Turning from the 
beginnings of society to the European civilisation of 
to-day, we see the same process at a far more advanced 
stage. Practically there are but seven or eight peoples in 
Europe to-day, and the common life of these peoples is 
more important than their separate life. Along with this 
integration social functions have become distinct and 
separate, and there is hardly any limit to the number of 
social groups which have arisen in this complex society to 
perform,these functions. 

Considering the different modes of social activity in 
their relation to each other, we find that in early times 
they were all but identical. A later age says that in the 
General patriarchal family the father was farmer and 
Character of manufacturer, judge, king, and priest; the fact 
the Early is, that all these functions originally are 
Social Group, ^j^ited in each person and in each group, 
because they do not yet exist as separate functions. So 
long as there is practically but one uniform type of social 
activity, there is no social influence to make the members 
of the group different from each other. Each person is 
like every other, joining in the hunt, seeking for food, 
making his hut or his weapon—and the only differences 
are due to difference of sex or of strength. The early 
group or “horde” lacked both definiteness and compact 
unity, and the groups differed from each other only with 
the different demands of their physical environment. 


DESCRIPTION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT 197 


Fundamental 

Forms of 

Social 

Activity 

become 

Distinct. 


Increasing social complexity may be considered from 
two standpoints:— {a) the fundamental forms of social 
activity become distinct, thus introducing a 
more extensive and more complex social struc¬ 
ture, and (6) simultaneously within each of 
these general modes of activity, greater com¬ 
plexity of function and structure is arising. 
The search for food and the effort for protec¬ 
tion become distinctly organised forms of activity, and 
the tribe assumes a definite structure with reference to 
each of them. Forms of social intercourse become fixed, 
the habit of respecting rights and enforcing rights arises, 
the need of protection against supernatural evils, and of 
communion with supernatural beings, leads to a distinctly 
religious activity; and with each new form of social 
activity the structure of society becomes more complex, 
and the dependence of one part upon another more 
intimate. While this change is often so gradual as to 
show no break, in many cases its results do seem to enter 
suddenly; as, for instance, when the introduction of 
slavery constituted for the first time a distinct industrial 
organisation. From the second standpoint, the growth of 
social complexity and unity is even more striking. Men 
have always needed food, companionship, protection; 
but the ways in which they have met these needs have 
varied exceedingly from age to age. The changes in the 
economic world, to take a typical example, show most 
clearly the differentiation and integration which are the 
outward mark of development. 

In the lower and earlier phases of society the need of 
food and of clothing is satisfied in the simplest manner 
The Simple ^y the means which nature provides, and no 
Economic desires are as yet developed which reach out 
Group. beyond the clan or “ horde.” Each group 

supplied its own needs; all the numbers helped to build 
the huts which were to protect them from rain and cold, 
all worked together to secure weapons and tools, all shared 


198 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


the product of the common chase. The industrial life of 
one such little group would he much like that of another, 
and within the group individuals would he very much 
alike, for even differences of sex could not yet lead to a 
uniformly different industrial life. 

Economic development began with the separation of 
economic activities, and we may point out three sources 
Be ■ 'n of which this sprang, viz.: {a) the ditfer- 
SeparatT^ ence between the strong and the skilled; (6) 
Economic difference between the sexes; and (c) differ- 

Functions ences introduced by a new form of political 
and Classes. • j.- • i.- i ^ 

organisation, in particular, slavery. 

A. The simple utensils of savage life required for their 
manufacture no skill which was beyond the reach of 
anyone, and conversely, no utensil requiring special skill 
could come into general use until some tribe was ready to 
support a class of toolmakers who should acquire and 
preserve this skill. The bow and arrow, or the canoe, 
could be made better when hunter and fisherman were 
ready to maintain someone who should devote himself to 
this work. Pottery, blankets, elaborate decorations, were 
not likely to attain any special degree of excellence until 
individuals could give their whole strength to particular 
forms of manufacture. In so far as the division of labour 
proved an advantage in meeting men’s desires, or in 
making the tribe stronger to divert attack, the habit 
would tend to become permanent and widespread—classes 
of manufacturers and of food producers would arise; a 
market would become necessary for the exchange of 
wares, and at length the growing business of exchange 
would call for a class of merchants, and a class of 
exporters. Division of labour tends to emphasise the 
differences of strength and of skill to which it was 
originally due; and as it becomes a necessity, the in¬ 
dustrial group must grow larger and more complex, in 
order that the simplest needs may be satisfied. 

B. The differences between the sexes played an im- 


DESCRIPTION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 199 


portant part in this process from almost the very 
beginning. Women could he compelled to work long 
before there were regular slaves, but they were less 
able to endure the fatigues of war and the chase. The 
advantages of this division of labour were so apparent, 
that it may have been an important factor in the 
development of more permanent family relations. The 
general line of division was between the outer world, 
and the inner world of the family which began to be 
formed. To the man fell the duties of protection from 
attacks of man and beast, and the procuring of game 
for food. The work of the home, such as the prepara¬ 
tion of food, the manufacture of garments, care for the 
children, the provision of whatever man may need or 
desire, this was commonly the woman’s lot. This source 
of differentiation was no less important than the preced¬ 
ing, in providing the basis for a higher type of social 
organisation. 

C. The connection between the political and industrial 
organisation of society is always close, but under 
primitive conditions it is peculiarly intimate. The 
preservation of captives taken in war to serve as slaves, 
is a step equally important for the development of the 
state and for the development of industry. By the use of 
slaves, continuous labour and combined labour were pos¬ 
sible for the first time, and with the general institution 
of slavery, the foundation was laid for the civilisations 
of antiquity. This single illustration shows liow a 
separation of political classes is the source of economic 
complexity, and consequently the cause of larger 


economic groups. 

The necessary result of the separation of 
industrial activities is a more complex indus¬ 
trial group. Each group requires all the 
different forms of production to satisfy the 
needs and desires of its members, so that 
as soon as these forms are separated the group thereby 


Results of 
the more 
Complex 
Economic 
Activity. 


200 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


grows more complex. Complexity means the possibility, 
if not the necessity, of more members in the group; 
the new form of industrial life tends to bring different 
groups together, where the earlier form had tended to 
separate them; at the same time each group follows its 
own course of development, so that any two groups are 
far less likely to resemble each other than were two of 
the earlier simple groups. Moreover, the more com¬ 
plex life means a different industrial environment for 
each individual in the group, so that social intiuences 
tended to make men different, where before they had 
tended to make them alike. 

It is difficult to set any limit to this process of the 
increasing complexity of economic life and economic 
Continuation structure; already it has gone so far that 
of this most of the human race stand in some sort 
Process. economic relation with each other. The 

reason of this process, in which any backward step is 
difficult, is twofold. From the standpoint of conscious 
purpose its advantages are so evident as to enlist in its 
favour the choice of thoughtful men. But evolution 
would be a slow and doubtful matter if it were left to 
thought and reasonable choice; the results of this process 
and the absolute need of a complex economic organisation, 
become embedded in the very nature of the individual, so 
that he devotes himself to a limited sphere of economic 
activity, without conscious recognition of the broader 
reasons for this course. Economic evolution has always 
been marked by a growing complexity and unity of 
economic life; but even when dignified by the name of 
a “ law ” this change does not explain economic progress. 

The marks of social evolution, which have been dis¬ 
cussed for the case of economic activity, are none the 
less evident in the other modes of social activity. The 
earliest political organisation of society was absolutely 
simple; and these simple political units were small, 
numerous, and in the same environment very much 


DESCRIPTION OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 201 


Political 

Activity 

becomes 

Broader 

and more 

Complex. 


alike. In the course of political development two forms 
of growing complexity may be distinguished. 
In the first place the state becomes composite. 
Smaller centres of political life are developed 
within the larger whole; and, as the central 
authority is relieved from attention to detail, 
it can perform the necessary functions of 
government for increasingly large bodies of men. Within 
the state there arise the province and the county, the 
town, the city, and the wards of the city; or, again, it 
is found possible to unite smaller bodies into one larger 
body on the principle which we have learned to call 
local self-government; the result in either case is a 
separation of political functions, and an integration of 
the resulting political groups into larger and larger 
wholes. And, in the second place, the functions of the 
central governing power are separated, and the executive 
head is no longer clothed with legislative and judiciary 
powers. In consequence of this process the modern 
state is a very complex affair. Few states have taken 
the place of numerous tribes, and these states show 
marked differences from each other as the result of 


different lines of development. 

The evolution of social activity in aesthetic lines has 
been quite fully analysed by Mr. Spencer in the essay to 
which reference has been made.^ The aesthetic 
Comprexit^ enjoyment, which began in simple forms with 
and Unity narrow range, gradually assumed forms more 
in other ^nd more complex, and simultaneously the 
sphere of its activity has been extending 
indefinitely. The evolution of intellectual activity has 
left its traces in the history of language. Under primi¬ 
tive conditions each group has its own simple language 
suited to its very simple needs. So far as these needs 
were the same for difierent tribes, the different languages 
would have about the same structure and range; they 


^ Spencer : Progress; its Law and Cause ('pp. 239-240^. 


202 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


were very much alike, in that they served the same 
purposes in the same manner. Social evolution brought 
about a more complex intellectual life, and at the same 
time it tended to unite different groups in the same 
intellectual activity. A few languages, complex and 
unlike in structure and range, take the place of very 
many languages of the simplest character and very much 
alike. The new language is formed by taking up into 
itself elements from the languages which it supplants, 
and by this means it is able to meet the needs of the 
higher intellectual life. The same rule holds for every 
form of social activity—increasing complexity and unity 
are the mark of social evolution. 

This process has continued until its results can be 
foreseen in clear outline. The unity of mankind, which 
« , . was once a prophetic vision, hidden from 

common eyes and accepted only upon faith, is 
at length being realised, as the most remote corners of the 
earth are broimht under the influence of one civilisation. 


The process of integration has touched every race, and its 
farther advance will be toward a more intensive unity—a 
more intimate unity of peoples already in contact. The 
result of greater complexity is an increasingly unique 
environment for each individual of the race, and every 
considerable advance in social evolution is marked not 
only by more sharply defined classes engaged in the 
different forms of social activity, but also by more distinct 
individuality among the members of these classes. The 
course of these processes is by no means even and un¬ 
interrupted, nor can we say as yet that this course 
coincides exactly with the different stages of social evolu¬ 
tion. It remains true that the most striking character¬ 
istics of social evolution are the facts of continuity, 
and of growing unity and complexity; the outcome of 
these processes is a unified mankind made up of unique 
individuals. 


CHAPTEE XIL 


PROCESSES OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 

To the casual observer of society, it is evident that social 
development is continuous, and that society tends toward 
Two Theories a state of greater complexity with larger and 
of Social De- more comprehensive social groups. But if we 
velopment. ^Quld look helow the surface, and seek a more 
definite statement of the actual processes in this develop¬ 
ment, we are met at the outset by most diverse views. 
Many of these are purely fantastic, and need not detain 
us, but after such have been set aside, there remain two 
theories of social development, almost contradictory in 
their statement, and yet each claiming the support of a 
large mass of facts. On the one hand, there is the 
genealogical theory of progress, accordiug to which types 
of culture are bred and scatter in the world, just as men 
are born and disperse; science has the interesting task 
of tracing each form of civilisation up the genealogical 
tree to the common source of all, and thus the history 
of civilisation is made clear. On the other hand is the 
theory! that social development is a process of agglomer¬ 
ation and assimilation, such that each step in progress 
may be explained as the interaction of heterogeneous 
elements. The consideration of these two views will 
lead the student, I believe, to recognise that each of 
these theories is concerned with a real process going on 
in society, but that neither deserves thfe name of the 
“ theory ” of social development. 

^ This theory is presented with great vigour, and enforced with much 
illustrative material, by Gumplowicz in his Eassenkam^ and Grundriss 
der Sociologic. 


204 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


Perhaps the most natural account of the development 
of society would explain it as a process of dispersion and 
differentiation. In every age the family, more 
Dispersion particularly the patriarchal family, has traced 
and Diiferen- its origin to some one ancestor, and his blood 
tiation. in the veins of many descendants is supposed 
1. Race In- unite them into one group. In this frag¬ 
ment of society it is seen that the original 
pair has several children more or less different, and that 
each of these has children in turn, so that succeeding 
generations increase (theoretically) in a geometrical ratio, 
and characteristics which have arisen may easily be per¬ 
petuated and increased. This explanation which men 
are in the habit of applying to a small portion of 
developing society, may also be applied to the race as 
a whole. The biblical account of creation has made 
the Christian world familiar with the conception of an 
original single pair from whom all men are descended. 
Here, as in the example on a smaller scale, generations 
theoretically increase in a geometrical ratio, and differences 
are easily perpetuated and increased. 

In support of the view that the human race has at 
times followed the course indicated by this scheme of 
Historical development, we may point to the historical 
Evidence for evidence for such centres of distribution. It 
Centres of been customary to speak of a cradle of 

Dispersion, south-western part of Asia, 

and thus to give a certain scientific content to the 
biblical account of Paradise and the early development 
of the human race. Nor can we doubt that there was 
such a cradle of humanity where men multiplied, and 
from which successive waves of immigration swept to 
the westward. The study of language and of culture 
makes us acquainted v/ith a few groups of peoples such 
as the Semitic and the Indo-Germanic, which are very 
wide-spread, and each of which seems to have come 
from one source. Used with the greatest care, this 


PROCESSES OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 205 


evidence still seems to point to centres of dispersion from 
which each group originally came. On the American 
continent, we can point out at least one such swarming 
place for the Indian races. Fish and game were plenty 
in the region of the Great Lakes; men multiplied rapidly, 
and as they became too numerous to find sufficient food 
even in such a place, one tribe after another seems to 
have separated from the parent stock, and gone forth to 
find a new home. Here again related languages and 
similar customs suggest a common source; while the 
appearance of the same sub-tribes and clans in each 
tribe, together with the same system of names and the 
same laws of relation, seem to indicate that each offshoot 
retained exactly the organisation of the parent tribe. 
From evidence of this character, I infer that dispersion 
was a real process; it is equally clear that we do not 
have and cannot have any such evidence that the whole 
human race came from one centre of this type. 

Those who have believed that the entire human race 
had a common origin have found it necessary to explain 
Differentia important differences between ethnic 

tion of groups as the result of a long-continued 
Physical process of differentiation. Children of the 
same parents differ, grandchildren may differ 
more widely; and distant descendants, who have lived 
under different conditions, will show far greater differ¬ 
ences. All those differences of environment, which have 
been discussed in an earlier chapter (chap, ii.), have 
gradually affected the races that were subject to them. 
The temperature and the amount of moisture in the 
air affect the physical constitution; some localities 
favour, and others hinder, intercourse of tribe with 
tribe; the character of the food supply will modify the 
tribe from its industrial side; conditions of security or 
insecurity will affect its vigour; and, finally, with the 
rise of civilisation, the range of differences in the 
environment of individuals is indefinitely increased. 


2o6 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


The Process 
of Physical 
Differentia¬ 
tion and 
Dispersion; 
Hesume. 


The facts already accessible' with reference to the effects 
of very different surroundings upon the Spanish or the 
English race, confirm the impression that this process 
of differentiation is going on, and that the varieties best 
adapted to given conditions are likely to be perpetuated. 
At the same time, the effort to account for important 
ethnic differences by the long-continued effects of en¬ 
vironment is as yet very far from being successful. 

Very grave objections may be brought against the 
theory that the greater ethnic differences have arisen 
gradually among the descendants of a single 
human pair; but we find abundant evidence 
that the differentiation and dispersion of 
human races is a real process actually going 
on. We can point out several centres of 
dispersion from which one race after another 
has gone out. We have good evidence that environment 
in and by itself has at least a limited direct influence 
both upon individuals and the race; and we know that 
any differences, however slight, which benefit the in¬ 
dividual or the race in a given environment, are almost 
sure to be perpetuated in the struggle for existence. 
As a theory of human development, the theory under 
discussion is inadequate, if not misleading; as a process 
constantly going on, its truth cannot be denied. 

The same theory which has been discussed in the 
sphere of physical development, has also exercised a 
. wide influence upon students of the various 
ation psychical life. The history of such 

Dispersion of institutions as the state, or the history of 
Forms of social manners and customs, has been repre¬ 
sented by the figure of a genealogical tree; 


Psychical 

Life. 


and any type has been "‘explained,” when it 
is traced back to the common origin from which all have 
sprung. Two examples will make this clearer, and at 
the same time will illustrate the truth and the weakness 
of the explanation offered. 


PROCESSES OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 


207 


The discovery of the Sanscrit language by European 
scholars, and the light which it threw upon tlie relation 
(a.)Language: languages in Europe, gave a powerful im- 

Dispersion. ' P^tus to the general study of the development 
of language. It was indeed a revelation that 
languages so different as the Slav and the German, the 
Celtic and the Greek, were intimately related as to root- 
meanings, inflectional endings, and sentence structure. 
The immediate inference from this group of new facts 
was that all these languages were descended from a 
common source, an original Indo-Germanic language, 
which, twenty years ago, scholars thought they could 
reconstruct with considerable accuracy. From the 
existence of this large group of languages, it was in¬ 
ferred farther that all languages could be classified in 
large genealogical groups; that each of these groups 
pointed to some common centre of dispersion; and finally 
it was suggested that these groups had themselves a 
genealogical connection with a more distant common 
source, although few traces of this could be pointed 
out. It is now clear that many of these inferences 
were unjustifiable, and they have been abandoned. As 
a process, ever going on in the history of language, the 
spread of language is an all-important fact. Faces carry 
their own languages with them as they migrate, and 
the effort to communicate with those who use other 
languages is likely to result in the gradual extension of 
the language which, under the circumstances, is best 
adapted to survive. As a theory of the development of 
language, however, the genealogical account of their 
descent is anything but satisfactory. 

Even apart from the influence of different environ¬ 
ment, language is never fixed and unchanging; and if 
Language : ^ne goes back to the period before the general 
Dilferentia- diffusion of printed books, and farther still, 
tion. to the period before the general use of writing, 

he finds that language changes much more rapidly than 


2o8 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


is possible to-day. The greatest difference between the 
dialects of one language to-day is a difference of pro¬ 
nunciation for the same vocables; and the change of 
pronunciation proceeds so rapidly, that the English 
spoken in the time of Shakespeare would not be easily 
intelligible to modern ears. The careful study of these 
changes may not reveal any universal laws, but it shows 
that these changes are all subject to law, and the laws 
vrhich hold in a given place and at a given time are 
being definitely formulated. Changes in the root mean¬ 
ings of words take place more slowly, but they are none 
the less real. Words of general meaning are restricted 
to particular uses, words applied to specific objects come to 
denote more general classes, literal use becomes metaphor, 
and the reverse.^ Even more striking changes in vocab¬ 
ulary arise through the decay of some words, and the 
genesis of others to do their work. The main reason 
for these changes is evident, when one considers the 
way in which language is learned. The child learns 
but gradually to speak the language which he hears, 
and no two persons speak a language in exactly the 
same way. Differences existing in the case even of 
one person affect the ideal of the community with 
reference to language, so that every change has a slight 
tendency to perpetuate itself. Moreover, language is 
but the way in which a type of culture finds expression, 
and each change in the type of culture is immediately 
reflected in the language of the people in question. 

While then we cannot find traces of any direct tendency 
to differentiation in language, such that the meanings 
Languages ^ word naturally split up within the same 
change and social group, we find numerous classes of 
separate. changes to which language is subject. When 
two languages derived from a common source have once 
lost the consciousness of their connection, these processes 

^ Abundant illustration of these changes may be found in Whitney’s 
Life and Growth of Language^ chap, v.-vii. 


PROCESSES OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 209 

of change meet with no check, and constantly widen 
the breach between them. ]N'evertheless, these facts of 
change do not constitute any complete theory of the 
development of language. 

With the conception that the different ethnic religions 
are parts of one process, there has been associated the 
(b Reli 'on- these religions were related as the 

DispersSi.^' ^^^^s in a genealogical tree, and that they 
might be satisfactorily explained by reference 
to some common source. The comparative mythologists, 
who have made language the foundation of their study 
of myths, have naturally brought systems of mythology 
into the same relation as groups of languages. The 
name of a divinity recurring in different religions^ 
suggests a common origin for these religions. The same 
types of divinity 2 at least suggest a common source 
from which their worship has spread, either as their 
worshippers migrated, or as other tribes came to recognise 
these divinities as their gods. The principles for the 
exact study of the dispersion of religions have not been 
determined with any definiteness, and the wild theories 
frequently propounded have cast discredit on this whole 
line of study. Nevertheless, we cannot avoid the belief 
that religion, like other phases of culture, has often been 
spread from common centres. With the migration of 
peoples from such centres, the religious side of their 
culture was spread abroad; and we have abundant 
evidence that, at least within historic times, religions 
have had a remarkable power of extending over civilisa¬ 
tions to which they were originally foreign. 

Eeli ion- iteligious beliefs are intimately connected 
Differentia- with philosophical beliefs as to the nature of 
tion. the world and of the soul, and each change 

1 The standing example of this is Dyans-pitar, Zeus-pater, Ju-piter. 

2 A goddess of love and generation (Astarte, Aphrodite, Venus), a god 
of the wine (Soma, Dionysos, Sabazios, Bacchus), a god of the sun, and 
another of the heavens. 

P 


210 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


in the latter is reflected in the beliefs that are more 
distinctly religious. Eeligious myth is almost as un¬ 
stable as other types of legend, except when it is in¬ 
timately connected with forms of religious practice; and 
even the explanations of religious practice become radi¬ 
cally different as a people advances to a new and higher 
stage of culture. No factor of religious life is so per¬ 
manent as the forms of sacred rites; but even these 
change slowly from age to age. Forms which have 
become dead are cast aside, and new practices gradually 
gain the authority which w^as formerly possessed by 
others. If, then, two peoples start together, the par¬ 
ticular forms of religious life are likely to become 
different, and all hindrances to this differentiation are 
removed when the two peoples have lost consciousness 
of their earlier relation. 

The consideration of the development of language and 
of religion, as examples of the development of psychical 
The Process shows that the process of dispersion is real, 
of Dispersion and that constant changes are occurring, which 
and Differ- result in differences. Three facts stand out in 
entiation. general process, (a) The fact of continuity. 

Conclusion, phase of psychical life, like each living 

being in the physical world, is the direct product of its 
past. (&) The fact of dispersion. Forms of psychical 
life are frequently spread from common centres, both by 
the migration of races, and by the direct migration of 
their types of culture, (c) The fact of diflerentiation. 
Changes are constantly going on in every form of genuine 
psychical life, and these changes make the psychical life 
of one group different from that of another. This last 
fact is quite as important in a developed society as in 
earlier times, and the integration of distinct groups in 
the performance of different social activities helps on 
such a differentiation within any given society. As a 
theory of the development of culture, this genealogical 
account of society is inadequate and often misleading. 


PROCESSES OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT, 211 


As processes constantly going on, dispersion and differ¬ 
entiation are real facts, and are playing a more important 
part in social evolution than ever before. 

In any comparison of civilised and uncivilised races 
as they exist to-day, the most striking difference relates 
to the size of a society. Among the Bush- 
Jf AggTomL-Africa, the groups or in- 
ation. Civil- cipient tribes are numerous, without organi- 
isation les- sation, and unstable. The lowest mountain 

sens number Qf or in Central America show 

of Social . . rr^ . . 

Groups. same characteristics. Turning to civilisa¬ 

tion, we find to-day but one society; it covers 
most of the globe, its organisation is very complex, and 
it has been comparatively stable for many centuries. 
Some smaller tribes have been exterminated by the 
“ march of civilisation,” but when the differences in 
culture have not been excessively great, the process has 
ordinarily been one of absorption and assimilation. The 
factors in the development of the Hebrew civilisation 
have left some traces in the later tribes, and the early 
history of the Greek city-state is an account of the 
fusing together of different elements into a larger whole. 
The condition of the uncivilised world to-day justifies us 
in assuming that the civilised society has been preceded 
by innumerable smaller societies; and we have abundant 
proof with reference to each of the earlier civilisations 
that this assumption is correct. 

The more elaborate classifications of different types of 
social aggregates bring out this fact of agglomeration 
even more clearly, and show something of its 
ClassffiTation iniportance. Spencer’s classification of different 
of different types of societies may serve as an illustration.^ 
Types of jn his “ simple ” society, “ the parts co-operate, 
Social Aggre- or without a regulating centre, for certain 

gRt6S« ^ 

public ends.” In the “compound” societies 
“the simple groups have their respective chiefs under a 

^ S]^encevI Principles of Sociology^ part ii. chap. x. 


212 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


supreme chief.” Such societies are naturally formed 
when one group asserts its superiority by subjecting 
other groups to its rule. As these compound societies 
get a more stable headship, and different parts come to 
depend more on each other, one of these may absorb 
others, and thus a doubly or a trebly compound society 
is formed. Without attributing too much weight to Mr. 
Spencer’s abstractions and terminology, we recognise that 
each change is the result of a new agglomeration, and 
that the classes in the more compound society partially 
represent the component parts, the original groups which 
it has absorbed. 

This suggests another process besides simple dis¬ 
persion, and another figure which represents progress 
statement of truly than the genealogical account of a 

the Process patriarchal society. From a purely external 
of Agg-lomer- standpoint, human progress may be repre- 
ation. sented as a process of agglomeration and 
assimilation. Granted the existence of an indefinite 
number of small groups, such as we find among any 
uncivilised people, progress begins when one group is 
able to use another for its own ends in some other way 
than by eating those who compose it. From this stand¬ 
point the story of human progress is always the same. 
One tribe subdues another, absorbs it, and rises by 
pushing it down. The leverage for human progress is 
quite generally found in humanity, not in nature alone. 
This is followed by an assimilation of the different 
elements into a more homogeneous whole. Men are 
brought together in larger and larger societies, until the 
human race is one, for the real unity of the race is an 
achievement, whether or not it be descended from a 
single pair. 

Viewed on its physical side, this process starts with 
the fact of very numerous, all but independent, groups 
of men. When it is put forward as a theory, that is, 
to explain the differences between men by tracing them 


PROCESSES OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 213 


back even farther than the beginnings of humanity, of 
course this process requires the polygenetic 
origin of our race. But in its more modest 
form, it starts with the facts of uncivilised life 
as they exist all over the globe. The process 


1. This 

Process 

regarded 

from its 

Physical 

Side. 


consists first in the agglomeration of these 


groups, either directly or indirectly; directly, 
as one absorbs another in toto, indii-ectly, as exogamous 
marriage gradually unites the separate groups into one 
larger society. Such agglomeration takes place very easily 
and naturally when two savage hordes come into relation; 
and it is none the less real when two civilised societies first 
touch, and then enter into connection with each other. 
It is only when two societies on very different planes 
of culture come into relation, that a true union seems 
to be difficult.^ The process which we are thus led to 
consider is by no means inconsistent with the process 
of race-dispersion, but it is far more important than 
such dispersion in explaining the rise of civilised society, 
for it is distinctly synthetic, while the former process 
was analytic. 

In this general process we may distinguish two 
elements—the persistence of race-characteristics, and 
the unification of different factors in a single 
complex social life. The theory of natural 
selection in its stricter form, like every other 
careful theory of heredity, starts with the 
postulate that the characteristics of each individual tend 
to persist in all his descendants. The popular belief 
that increasing differentiation in the descendants of a 
single pair is independent of hereditary influences, is 
quite inconsistent with this position. In the attempt 
to construct a science of sociology, any neglect of the 


Persistence 
of Race- 
character¬ 
istics. 


Celts and Teutons have remained distinct in Great Britain ; and the 
comparatively high civilisations of parts of East Africa and Central 
America have left no traces on the civilisation from Europe, by which 
they have been superseded. 


214 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


scientific theory of heredity is exceedingly unfortunate, 
and the study of the process under discussion has done 
good service by bringing clearly into view the persistence 
of race-characteristics. The fact of differentiation it 
readily explains as due to the crossing of types already 
in existence. While anthropologists are inclined to 
question the reality of the genesis of new, independent 
physical types, the intermarriage of families and the 
agglomeration of tribes have led to constantly increasing 
sets of new combinations. The real source of the differ¬ 
ences in modern society is to be found in the different 
original elements which entered into its composition. 

Corresponding to the persistence of race-characteristics 
is the development of a wider and wider social life, in 
which these characteristics find expression. 
of^^lturT truth, these original differences only find 
their true environment when one race comes 
to share the same common life with another race. If 
the races were exactly alike, when they were united 
there would be no basis for the development of a complex 
social structure, and the stability which results from 
interdependence in such a structure would be lacking. 
Different races contribute each its own element to the 
common life, and the life developed out of these factors 
tends to be permanent, because each factor comes to 
depend for its very life on every other. When two 
races come together, the characteristics of each persist, 
and a new, higher social life is developed out of the 
peculiar culture which had belonged to each independently; 
the agglomeration of social groups is accompanied by an 
assimilation or unification of the life of each group into 
a life that is not only more complex, but richer. 

On turning from the consideration of man*s physical 
development to the development of civilisation, we find 
the same process of agglomeration and assimilation, and 
its importance in the psychical world is no less than 
its importance in the realm of biology and ethnology. 


PROCESSES OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 215 


2. This 

Process 

regarded 

from the 

Psychical 

Side. 


The fundamental principle of union among the members 
of a group is essentially a psychical principle; 
and when two social groups combine, the 
psychical life of each tends to persist in the 
complex psychical life which is a result of 
their union. This is very evident in the case 
of social institutions, which are but the ex¬ 
ternal forms in which the inner life finds expression. 
When two tribes unite, the institutions of each tend to 
persist; and the result is that each institution is 
profoundly modified and enriched, or more commonly, 
that the institutions of one group prevail at one point, 
and those of the other group at other points. Take, 
for example, the results of the Doric migration into 
the Peloponnesus, as pictured by a recent historian of 
Greece.^ Eude, vigorous tribes from the northern moun¬ 
tains conquered without great difficulty the weakened 
representatives of a civilisation which once had influ¬ 
enced all the shores of the ^gean Sea. The conquerors 
brought with them their own political and social 
institutions, and these they retained with but little 
change. The implements of warfare used by the con¬ 
quered people, and many of the arts they practised, 
were to a considerable degree adopted by the invaders, 
as being superior to their own; the religious rites of 
the Dorians seem to have been welded together with 
the rites which they found and retained. To such 

amalgamations of different elements the Greek people 
owed the excellence of their later civilisation. 

One of the curious phenomena of language is the 

variety of expressions which may be used with but 

, , , , slight difference of meaning. Not only 

(a) Agglome- o 

ration and phrases, but single words are often duplicated 
Assimilation in several synonyms. In the case of the 
of Languages, languages of modern Europe this phenomenon 
is very easily explained; for the various expressions for 
1 E. Meyer, Geschichte des AUerthuinSy Band II. Zweites Buck. 


2i6 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


one idea can often be directly traced to some local usage, 
or to elements of the language which seem farther apart 
in their origin. The real question is, not why the words 
or phrases mean much the same thing, but why they have 
been retained in the resulting language, when their mean¬ 
ing was so nearly alike. The very great number of nearly 
synonymous roots in Semitic languages can but be due 
to the same source, viz., the different original elements 
out of which the language has arisen; and the main differ¬ 
ence between these languages and the Indo-European 
consists merely in the fact that they retained so many 
roots with nearly identical meaning. An early step in 
this process may be found in the languages of the very 
lowest races. Here a great abundance of roots exist 
for the few concrete objects which require names, while 
there is little or no connection between the roots de¬ 
noting similar objects among tribes a little way apart. 
The examination of languages in use at different stages 
of culture suggests that agglomeration and assimilation 
are a most important process in the development of 
language. 

Different elements of language share the same tenden¬ 
cies to persistence and assimilation which mark all 
Tendency social institutions. When two languages 
to Persistence come together, they never fail to coalesce, 
and though the process may be gradual, and social 

Assimilation, some time take the place of 

geographical lines in separating the languages.^ This 
process is not a single one, for each element in each 
language tends to persist, and exerts its influence on 
the result. Naturally the sentence-structure, and the 
vocabulary, and the modes of inflection of either language 
will not have each the same influence, and the result may 
be a highly complex combination. Thus the Babylonian 
language is analysed into several components; the mode 

^ The persistence of French and Saxon elements in different strata of 
the English people has been noted, for instance, in Scott’s Ivanhoe. 


PROCESSES OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 217 

of writing is said to be Accadian in origin, the sentence- 
structure is Semitic, and the vocabulary includes words 
from both sources. 

In explaining the development of language, the im¬ 
portance of the process of agglomeration and assimilation 
This Process ^^st not be overlooked. At least the more 
in the important differences between the various 
D^evelopment elements of a language are due to different 
of Language. varied speech of 

modern civilisation, the results of this process may be 
preserved intact, so that they are easily traceable; but 
the process was no less important in earlier times. When 
two uncivilised languages come together, the same sound 
may preserve the very different meanings which had 
been assigned to it in each of these languages, and often¬ 
times what we call the general meaning of the word is 
the result of more definite meanings modifying each 
other. Suppose a language dispersed with the tribes who 
speak it, from a common centre. Each group will adopt 
elements entirely new from the languages with which it 
comes in contact, and its own vocabulary and structure 
will be gradually modified by the influence of these 
languages. Eor instance, in the matter of vocabulary, 
the old word-meanings will be slightly deflected, both 
by words of similar sound, and by slight differences in 
the ideas which the words originally expressed. In this 
way many of the differences between the dialects of a 
language, originally one, may be explained; and, by 
means of this process, each language is constantly en¬ 
riched by the elements which it incorporates into itself. 

Turning to the history of religion, we find that there 
is very much more to be explained than the mere fact 

,,, . , that the religions of different races are not 

(D) Agglome- ^ *11 

ration in the the same. The religion of any civilised people 

History of is a very complex matter, and elements from 
Keligion. different sources may be traced in the religion 
as well as in the language of such a people. The history 


2i8 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


of early Greek religion tells of a persistent tendency to 
adopt religious beliefs and practices from Phenicia, from 
Thrace, from Asia Minor, and from Egypt. The Eoman 
Empire followed the example of Babylon and of earlier 
states in Egypt, when it adopted the gods of Italy and 
of the conquered nations as members of its own pantheon. 
It is customary to trace the complex forms of modern 
Christian belief and practice back to three main sources; 
the influences of Palestine, of Greece, and of Eome, but 
each nation which has accepted Christianity has in some 
measure modified its form, and within its catholic faith 
may be traced survivals of many primitive forms of 
religion. The complex character of civilised religions 
suggests (i) that they contain elements which differ 
radically because they came from different sources, and 
(2) that forms of religious faith and practice have a 
remarkable power of persistence. 

In fact the interaction of heterogeneous elements in 
religion and the fusion of these elements into new and- 
Fusion of more complex forms is almost the whole 
Beligious content of the external history of worship. 
Forms. objects with which the idea of God is 

associated, often show the traces of this process. Some 
of the composite idols of India may be readily analysed 
into their component parts. The gods of the developed 
Greek religion contain elements derived from local cults 
all over Greece, as well as many elements from foreign 
sources, and all the imagination of the Greek people 
failed to give them a clearly defined unity. A similar 
process of fusion may be followed in the development of 
belief in a future life with its rewards and punishments. 
Persian, and Babylonian, and perhaps Egyptian ideas 
seem to have aflected later Jewish conceptions, and in 
the early church these were profoundly modified by 
Greek lines of thought. Again, the same spot has often 
served as a holy place for a heathen temple, a Christian 
church, and a Mohammedan mosque; and not infrequently 


PROCESSES OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 219 

much the same rites have been practised there from time 
immemorial, with only the adoption of some new elements 
as the religion nominally changed. The more careful 
study of religious history confirms the impression that 
the different factors of religion have a wonderful power 
of persistence, and that differences in the forms of a 
religion are in large measure due to an original difference 
of the religions which have gone before it. 

Finally, the effort to discover the reason for religious 
development leads the student back to the same line of 
Hetero- thought. New forms of religious belief and 
geneity the practice are due to the conjunction of earlier 
Condition of forms; the forms which we are wont to call 
Progress. higher, arise through the interaction of forms 
that seeni to us more crude. All the great ethnic 
religions of the world, like all the civilisations with 
which they were associated, are the product of epochs 
and of countries where there was a vigorous interaction 
of different ethnic elements. The development of new 
and higher forms of thought and of life in Christianity 
itself may be traced to external stimulating influences of 
the same sort. The agglomeration and fusion of different 
elements is not only the cause of complexity, but the 
condition of genuine progress.^ 

In the record of the development of the race and of 
its civilisation, the process which we have just been 
Process of considering stands beside the process of dis- 
Agglomera- pcrsion and differentiation. Alone it is no 
tion and adequate explanation of human progress, but 
Assimilation: ^ process ever going on as one phase of 

Conclusion, development. It involves two principles, 

(i) Physical and psychical characteristics tend to persist 
indefinitely. (2) These characteristics are modified in- 

^ No student will regard the process of agglomeration just described 
as a satisfactory explanation of progress. It is only the condition of 
development and progress. Least of all can the different elements that 
have entered into Christianity be regarded as the final explanation of the 
higher religious faith and life. 


220 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


definitely by the contact of race with race, but each 
constituent element exercises its influence in the forma¬ 
tion of the new product. Consequently, physical and 
psychical differences in developed civilisation are, in the 
main, due (a) to different sources from which the product 
is derived, and (&) to new types which may have arisen 
by the combination of elements originally distinct. 


CHAPTER XIII. 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 


The processes in the development of human society which 
have thus far been discussed, give little or no clue to the 
The Real nature of the forces at work to produce this 

Nature of development. We may show that there is a 

Progress. unity between the present of society and its 

past; that social relations are becoming more complex, 
and, at the same time, extending more widely; that a 
process of dispersion and differentiation, as well as a 
process of amalgamation, may be discovered by analysing 
the course of social development; but, even if these 
receive the name of “laws,” they do not indicate the 
real nature of the fact to be explained. A race does 
change w’hen placed in a different environment; races do 
modify each other when they come in contact. But what 
has this to do with progress ? 

In the study of organisms, a set of facts quite similar 
to those just enumerated had long been somewhat familiar 
to biologists, and the conclusion that organic 
species had arisen by a process of development 
had more than once been suggested; but it 
remained for the discoverer of the law of 
natural selection to show the meaning of these 
facts., and thus to give a reasonable account of biological 
evolution. Popular ideas of evolution and the struggle 
for existence are so vague, ^ that it is necessary to outline 
this theory before attempting to apply it to human 
society. The accepted theory of natural selection may 


The 

Biological 
Theory of 
Natural 
Selection. 


221 


222 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


be stated in three propositions. («) Organisms tend to 
multiply in some geometrical ratio, so that far greater 
numbers are produced than can find means of subsistence, 
(&) Offspring are essentially like their parents; never¬ 
theless, they differ somewhat from either parent, and 
from each other. (c) In the competition with other 
organisms for the means of subsistence, those members 
of a given species which are best adapted, to meet 
existing conditions will survive, and leave more abundant 
offspring. The survival of the more fit is the key to 
development. These propositions need but a few words 
of explanation. 

The theory of evolution starts with the fact that the 
normal rate of increase for any organism is such that 
(a) Multipli- number of offspring exceeds the number 
cation of of the parents, and that this increase tends 
Organisms, pg perpetuated. “ There is no exception 
to the rule that every organic being increases at so 
high a rate, that if not destroyed, the earth would soon 
be covered by the progeny of a single pair.” “ The 
elephant is reckoned the slowest breeder of all known 
animals , . at its probable minimum of natural 
increase .... after a period of from 740 to 750 years, 
there would be nearly 19,000,000 elephants alive, 
descended from the first pair,” in case each individual 
lived the normal length of life.^ Such calculations show 
very clearly that the actual numbers of any given species 
do not depend on the normal number of its progeny, 
but rather on the conditions of life to which it is subject. 
The necessary result of this rate of increase is a direct 
or indirect competition between members of the same 
species, as well as between members of different species; 
and the more rapid the rate of increase, the larger the 
number of individuals who perish in this competition. 

The very existence of fixed species depends on the 

^ Darwin, Origin of S])eciesy 6th ed. p. 51. Cf. Wallace, On Natural 
Selectioriy pp. 29-205. 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 223 

familiar fact that offspring resemble their parents. This 

(b) Heredity resemblance would he even clearer, except 

and Varia- that the characteristics of either parent seem 
bility of to appear indifferently and in new combina- 
Organisms. child, while characteristics of 

more remote ancestors may reappear after being latent 
for several generations. A general permanence of type 
is guaranteed by the fact that features of the type which 
may be lacking in one parent are ordinarily present in 
the other; and again, by the lack of fertility which is 
common when both parents vary much from the type. 
With this relative permanence of type is always asso¬ 
ciated some variation between even the offspring of the 
same parents. The different characteristics of the two 
parents combine to produce entirely new characteristics. 
It has often been maintained that the “ law ” of use and 
disuse affects these variations; but whatever their source, 
the fact of variations is evident to every observer. “ Every 
organ, every character, every feeling is individual; that is 
to say, varies from the same organ, character, or feeling in 
every other individual.” In this variation is found the 
possibility of selection and of progress. 

Struggle is both the law of life and the law of progress. 
The organism stands in a sort of antithesis to nature, 
and its life is a constant assertion of partial 

(c) Biological independence over against the forces of nature, 

’ both inanimate and animate. This correspond¬ 
ence with environment includes adaptation to pliysical 
conditions of land, climate, &c.; power to secure nourish- 
n;ent; power of defence against other organisms; power 
of propagation. In each relation the individual must 
maintain itself, and that better than its rivals. Placed 

1 Wallace, On Natural Selection, p. 266 . On pp. 287 - 290 , the uni¬ 
versality of this law of variation is widely illustrated for plants and 
animals. “The experience of all cultivators of plants and breeders of 
animals shows that when a sufficient number of individuals are examined, 
variations of any required kind can always be met with.” Cf. Origin of 
Species, ch. i. ii. 


224 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


in competition with other organisms, it must not simply 
adapt itself to physical conditions, but so adapt itself 
as to survive when others fall; it must be endowed with 
power to secure sufficient nourishment more easily than 
its competitors; it must be able to defend itself from 
attack, either directly by weapons, or indirectly by power 
to escape, or finally, it must meet attack by producing 
offspring in such numbers that some may escape. 
“Struggle” may hardly seem the word to express the 
relation of one plant to another, and yet the metaphor 
is hardly forced, when the fact is that the plant perishes, 
unless it meets present conditions better than its com¬ 
petitors.^ 

Combining these three points, it is evident that the 
immense destruction of life resulting from the lavish 
Biological production of life for a limited region is con- 
Survivai of stantly a destruction of those less fitted to 
the Fittest, meet existing conditions. The fittest survive, 
and useful variations are multiplied by the same forces 
that originally preserved them. In the so-called conflict 
with inanimate nature, such varieties will survive as 
are fitted to meet these material conditions; and where 
the number of contending varieties is considerable, fitness 
to material conditions is constantly increased by weeding 
out the less fit. In the biological world, organisms must 
be able to secure themselves against the attack of other 
organisms; in this form of conflict, the less vigorous, 
the weaker in combat, the slower, the less cunning, 
perish, while those better able to defend themselves are 
the ones that survive and propagate their kind. Finally, 
within the same species, the struggle for females and 
sexual selection is only second to the forms of S'election 
just mentioned. The law of biological evolution is the 
continual lavish production of life, and the multiform 
struggle, in which the weak perish, while the strong 
survive and propagate their kind. 

^ Origin of S]gecieSy chap. iii. 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY 225 

It is evident that even in the purely biological sphere 
these factors are not co-ordinate, and are subject to 
Modifications influences. Sexual selection is not 

of the determined on the basis of physical strength 
Biological or cunning alone, and it may often work at 
variance with this. The gregarious instinct 
is a very important modifying factor. In the case of 
species whicli have developed this instinct, it may 
altogether outweigh -individual strength; it may even 
oppose the development of individual strength, when 
individualism is at variance with the needs of the flock. 
So the family instinct changes the working of natural 
selection as soon as it gains any strength. In general, 
the young of birds and mammals are not exposed to the 
full force of conflict till after some weeks or even months 
of protection; and until that time, it is the whole family 
which as a unit enters into the struggle for existence. 
Such modifying influences break the force of struggle for 
the individual, and change the conditions of life for the 
species, by bringing larger units, groups or families, into 
competition. It is however merely a change of the 
conditions of struggle, a change in the meaning of what 
is fit, not the cessation of the struggle for existence. In 
view of these and other modifying factors, it is often 
convenient to consider the real struggle from an ideal 
standpoint, and to speak of it as a competition of types, 
rather than a contest of individuals. 

The word “ fittest,” as well as the word “ struggle,” has led 
to much misunderstanding. In the actual struggle for exist¬ 
ence, what seems most beautiful, what is best adapted for man’s 
use, what even seems highest, are by no means sure to be 
preserved. The weed has a great advantage over the wheat, 
the English sparrow over the thrush, because they are best 
adapted to given conditions. But with changes in conditions 
and the constant introduction of new competitors, useful 
variations are always preserved. In the accumulation of 
variations in all sorts of different directions, lies the possibility 
of the more complex organisms which are commonly called 
higher. 


226 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


In the case of man, the factors which modify the 
simple working of biological law become far more im¬ 
portant, so that its whole character is changed. 
Of these factors, three deserve special con- 
struggle for sideration. Social units are more numerous, 
Existence in more compact, and more lasting, than any 
Man gregarious groups among animals; with the 

growth of society, competition is limited less 
by territorial lines, and more by new lines between 
differentiated forms of activity; and, thirdly, struggle 
and survival are raised gradually out of the physical 
into the psychical sphere. 

Even among animals, gregarious habits modify the 
simple action of natural selection. Birds which migrate 
together, fish that swim in shoals, protect 
of Se^s^ciaf themselves by their very numbers; and when 
Group as a the chamois, or the buffalo on the western 
Fac^tor^^ plains, set a sentinel to watch while the herd 
grazes, the group protects itself as a whole 
more successfully. The groups among least civilised 
men are ordinarily more closely bound together than in 
the case of any animals, and they enter as a whole into 
the struggle for existence. 

The less civilised Indians formerly inhabiting the 
Pacific coast of North America, like the lower races 
in South Africa or Australia, lived in clans, 
the Family clan-relationships were the most sacred 

thing in life. Within the clan there was some 
competition between individuals, but the real struggle for 
existence was the effort of the clan as a whole to secure 
food, and to protect itself from physical evils and attack 
by man or beast. As the family became more stable, till 
it could be called the very basis of human society, its 
close union shielded its members from the real brunt 
of the struggle of life. The family as a whole seeks 
protection for itself from cold and wet, and from attack; 
all unite to protect and cherish the weakest member, so 


JVA TURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 227 

that the only world in which he lives is the world made 
by the family. The family (chap, viii.) has been shown to 
be the normal unit in economic life, in social life, and 
even in the state. In these different forms of activity, 
families, or heads of families, are the acting units, and 
selection is primarily a selection of the family best 
adapted to given conditions. 

Or again, the local community, town or city, developing 
as it does a considerable degree of common life, has to 
The Town in ^^eet the conditions of life to which it is 
the struggle subject as a whole. A strong and genuine 
for Existence. life is a guarantee of security to 

the citizens, it enables the city to prosecute public works 
easily and cheaply for the comfort of the citizens, it is 
a primary condition in making the city desirable for 
large manufacturing and business concerns; in a word, 
the true city protects its citizens from many phases of 
the struggle for existence when it proves its power to 
meet successfully the conditions of its municipal life. 
The community competes with other communities, and 
the “ more fit ” survives; thus a part of the struggle for 
existence is taken off from individuals. 

The actual competition between communities is often ob¬ 
scured by the complexity of these relations, and the slowness 
with which its results a23pear. The reports as to the way 
inhabitants of Basel moved elsewhere to escape an odious 
income tax, and of the withdrawal of investments from the 
State of Colorado from fear of Populist rule, so far as the 
reports are true, illustrate the form that competition may take. 

It is unnecessary to discuss all the peculiar forms of 
social groups that arise in the economic life, the political 
Competition distinctly psychical life of society, 

of Groups for in each case the same principle holds good. 
Modifies Groups compete, the factory, or bank, or school, 
struggle of Qj, political party that is best adapted to exist- 
ing conditions wins in this struggle; and tiie 
individual is only a common soldier in the successful or 


228 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


defeated army. Within the group the individual com¬ 
petes with his companions, but in the world at large the 
man has few’ battles to fight alone, for it is a contest of 
group with group. The conditions to w’hich the survivor 
is best adapted, are no longer primarily physical, nor are 
they psychical in the narrow sense of the word; the 
conditions are social, and the man is ever being “ selected,” 
who is best adapted to the new’ life in society. 

The second important change in the working of natural 
selection is also a direct result of social development. 
2 Lines Among animals the struggle for existence is 

limiting narrowly limited by territorial lines. The 

struggle are thistle and the grass compete for the same 

Territorial ground; food and climate determine 

for a given locality the animals that can 
flourish there. The growth of human society is a 
constant breaking down of territorial limitations, and 
with all that the state may do to “ protect ” its precious 
industries or to erect Chinese walls about its ancient 
institutions, it is no longer able to shut off its life from 
the current of the world’s life. The old territorial lines 
are succeeded by far more complex lines of limitation 
that arise in the development of the social structure 
itself. The struggle for social position is between com¬ 
paratively few competitors, cut off from the rest of the 
world by lines above and below. The economic structure, 
which stands between human needs and the source from 
which these needs are to be met, illustrates the point 
even more clearly. The effort of the tribe, and much 
later of the feudal household, to supply the needs of its 
members, has been transformed into a manifold com¬ 
petitive activity in which the w^hole world is involved. 

With the disappearance of local lines, new lines of 
kind limit competition to a considerable degree. The 
individual iron-worker competes primarily only with a 
limited number of men who know how to perform the 
same task in the manufacture of iron products. The 


229 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 

miner in Pennsylvania competes with those who have 
the same skill; and the fact of distance has so little 
weight that men with the same skill in Wales or 
Hungary may underbid him for his position. The 
successful candidate for one chair in a German university 
is an American, for another, an Englishman born in 
South Africa. In the art-world of Pome or Paris men 
of every nationality meet on all but equal terms. In 
the world of thought and of art, as, indeed, in the 
political wmrld, the local lines of struggle are largely 
supplanted by new lines of kind. 

The third important factor modifying the simple 
working of natural selection, is the fact that the main 
3. Import- source of strength, and the standard of fitness 
ance of as well, are no longer physical but psychical. 
Eeason as a Gradually physical struggle is being supplanted 
Fac^to^r^^ by competition on psychical lines. The con¬ 
flict with nature is entirely transformed by 
man’s power of invention; obstacles and hindrances are 
overcome by the power of reason, and are even utilised 
for human ends; the forces of nature are harnessed to 
do man’s work for him. With the new psychical develop¬ 
ment of imitation, gains like these are passed on from 
place to place and from generation to generation. Love 
of association is developed into new and higher sentiment, 
and the new bonds of union no outside force can break. 
Habits become in man the foundation of character; 
wlien the infinite worth of moral character is once 
recognised, new ends demand the energy of the man and 
the social group, and struggle that is really social becomes 
an ethical struggle directed towards ethical ends. In 
fact all distinct and conscious recognition of the future, 
all effort to direct present activity in view of purposed 
ends, is the work of human reason modifying the siuiple 
struggle for existence. It has indeed been argued by Mr. 
Benjamin Kidd in a recent volume, that inasmuch as 
man’s reason {i.e. his self-interest) affords no sanction for 


230 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


the sacrifice of the individual for the good of the race, 
reason only tends to check the operation of natural 
selection. A larger view of man’s reason, recognising 
that each gain in psychical power binds him more closely 
to his fellows, and impels him to work in and for society, 
would have prevented this error. The presence of reason 
entirely changes the form and sphere of natural selection, 
but the fact remains. 

The result of these new factors, modifying the simple 
force of natural struggle and selection, can hardly be over¬ 
estimated. John Fiske {Destiny of Man, p. 96) 
the ^^ruggle ^ooks forward to the elimination of physical 
for Existence strife, and claims that this “ means that the 
which these universal struggle for existence, having suc- 
ceeded in bringing forth that consummate 
product of creative energy, the human soul, 
has done its work, and will presently Cease.” Darwin 
touches this question, at the close of his epoch-making 
book,^ in the following words:—“ Important as the 
struggle for existence, has been, and even still is, yet 
as far as the highest part of man’s nature is concerned, 
there are other agencies more important. For the moral 
qualities are advanced, either directly or indirectly, much 
more through the effect of habit, the reasoning powers, 
instruction, religion, &c., than through natural selection.” 

The change which Mr. Fiske, like Mr. Darwin be¬ 
fore him, has sought to signalise by limiting the phrase 
natural selection to the lower, physical plane, is indeed 
one of the greatest importance. The competing units 
are of an entirely different type, the lines limiting 
struggle and selection have altered, the power of reason 
and all that it implies have entirely changed the plane 
of struggle; consequently the manner in which the fittest 
survive can no longer be the same; still, I believe, 
struggle remains as the very condition of life and 
progress. 


^ Descent of Man, ed. 2, p. 618. 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 


231 


The only case in which struggle seems to be eliminated is 
found in a few communities where two conditions are approxi¬ 
mately fulfilled—(a) isolation from all the rest of the world, 
and (&) such a social crystallisation that each person accepts 
his definite position in the community with no thought of any 
competition with others. 

Much as the struggle for existence may he modified 
in the case of man, it is hardly conceivable that it should 
Natural appear here, so long as the same conditions 

Selection are present alike in the animal world and in 
in Human the distinctly human world. In considering 
Society. natural selection as the principle of social 
development, I desire to show {a) that the conditions 
which produce struggle and compel selection in the 
biological world are found in the world of human society; 
{h) that here also struggle is the necessary result of 
these conditions, and that it is growing keener, ra^ther 
than tending to disappear; and (c) that the consequent 
selection is at the basis of social development.^ 

The condition of struggle is multiplication—multipli¬ 
cation so rapid that the individual must vindicate his 
A. The place in the world by superiority to com- 

Bioiogical panions for whom there is no place. The 

Conditions ^ .. . „ , . i ^ t 

of Struggle conditions ot selection are heredity with 

and Selection. , variability, and a struggle in which only the 
selected strong survive. Variability is necessary, that 
there may be varieties between which to select; heredity, 
that the selected variations may be preserved, and 
become the starting-point of other useful variations. 
For organisms proper, struggle, and selection, and pro¬ 
gress, are the necessary outcome of these conditions. 
In so far as the same conditions are present in human 
society, the result is necessarily the same—struggle, 
selection, and progress through selection. 

Man is an animal, though ‘‘a spark of divinity dwell 
in his frame of dust”; and as an animal, he is subject 
1 The second and third points are discussed in the next chapter. 


232 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 

to the laws governing animal organisms. His rate of 

TTi. -./r i..- increase is said to be slower than that of any 

The Multi- 

plication of other animal; but “ even slow-breeding man 
Man follows has doubled in twenty-five years, and at this 
law”^^^^^ rate, in less than a thousand years, there would 
literally not be standing-room for his progeny.”^ 
Statistics quoted in an earlier chapter (chapter ii. p. 55) 
prove that the rate is normally high enough to exert 
constant pressure on the food supply. Where this is 
not the case, the race degenerates; where this is not 
the case in a given class in society, that class must be 
recruited constantly from other classes, or it loses its 
social position. 

Mr. Galton, Hereditary Genius, p. 340, has shown theoreti¬ 
cally the doom of any class which multiplies less rapidly than 
the rest of the community. Other observers in France and 
Germany find that, as a matter of fact, the higher classes in 
any form of social activity are only maintained by constant 
recruits “selected” from the lower classes. 


In a word, the same set of facts are found here as in 
the case of the other animals; and here also the necessary 
consequence of rapid multiplication is struggle for exist¬ 
ence. I need hardly add that progress is not favoured 
by an abnormally rapid rate of increase, either in the 
case of man or of animals; natural selection itself favours 
the race that multiplies just rapidly enough to produce 
a healthy struggle. For man, as for some of the stronger 
animals, the rate is low enough so that relatively few 
actually perish in the struggle for existence. 

In like manner, the laws of heredity and variation are 
the same for man as for any other creature. Offspring 
Laws of their parents; differences in 

Heredity in the two parents, and perhaps other causes, 
the case of produce an indefinite number of slight varia- 
tions in every child; such variations as help 
the child to meet existing conditions are preserved, 

^ Darwin, Origin of Species, p. 51. 


Multiplica¬ 
tion as the 
Cause of 
Social 
Struggle. 


NA TURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 233 

and ultimately increased. Social relationships, and in 
particular the human family, greatly modify the results 
that appear under these laws. The greatest change in 
the results, however, is due to the fact that the environ¬ 
ment, with reference to which selection is made, is 
primarily social. The source of man’s strength lies in 
society; the variations that aid him in the struggle for 
existence are mainly psychical; consequently, physical 
variations of type are largely overlooked, and have 
relatively little result for man.^ 

The multiplication of men, who are obliged to compete 
for place and food, is in itself enough to transform every 
mode of social activity into a form of social 
struggle. In the economic world, constant re¬ 
adjustments in view of varying markets and 
new machinery, obscure the simple facts as 
to the relation of competition and population. 
It is clear, however, that even in times of expansion 
and for the lowest positions in the industrial world, 
a certain degree of selection is possible. Among those 
who are at the bottom of the scale, and indeed among 
the men in any one economic class, natural multi¬ 
plication is ordinarily rapid enough to lead to struggle 
for position. Even in the case of such an abnormally 
rapid industrial development as that which took place in 
England during the first half of the present century, 
population followed the growth of industry very closely; 
workers multiplied quite as rapidly as the positions to 
be filled, and competition became keener, rather than 
less severe. 

In developed human society, the biological factor lead¬ 
ing to struggle is far less apparent than the social factor, 
by which I mean man’s desire to secure a letter social 
position, in order that he may letter satisfy his needs. 
Mr. George (quoted by Kidd, Social Evolution, p. 259, 
n. i) says of man, “He is the only animal whose desires 
1 Cf. John Fiske, Destiny of Man, pp. 58-66. 


234 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


increase as they are fed, the only animal that is never 
satisfied.” The removal of barriers between social classes 
has gradually extended the reach of social ambition, till 
it has no more limits, except the power of the individuaTs 
imagination. The masters in the industrial world are, for 
the most part, men of far vision and iron wull, who have 
striven toward a distant goal till it came within their 
grasp. In “social” life, in the political world, natural 
multiplication necessarily leads to struggle; but ambition 
for “ social ” and political position is a far more important 
factor in making the struggle intense. The higher any 
one rises, the keener the struggle, for his competitors 
have tasted success, and revealed the power to win, and 
their appetite is only whetted for more. The social 
motive to struggle increases in something like geometrical 
ratio: the contest it produces in the higher classes is often 
so keen as to stand in the way of real development. 

In the distinctly psychical forms of social activity, a 
constantly increasing number of men seek to make a 
Conditions of themselves. Whatever be the cause 

struggle in that SO large a number seek to make a 
Psychical place in the world of art, or of science, 
or again in the so-called learned pro¬ 
fessions, an increasing number of individuals, desiring 
to attain a comparatively limited number of positions, 
must meet the same fate as the units that multiply 
rapidly in the biological world. Eapid multiplication 
soon results in a struggle for existence, in which the 
weaker fall. The artists and the lawyers who fail, are 
simply those who have fallen out in the keen struggle 
for a particular kind of existence. The highly-educated 
German musician, who earns enough by copying music 
to pay a little for board at the poor-house, has failed 
because so many others, in some respect better fitted 
than he, have entered the lists with him, and made the 
contest too severe. Simple multiplication at any one 
point must lead to struggle; but the second factor, the 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 235 

desire to secure a better position, constantly reinforces 
the former, and its power increases rapidly as society 
develops. 

The second condition of selection in the world of 
biology, viz., heredity and variation, must also be fulfilled 
Heredity struggle thus produced is to result 

Variation in real selection and progress in the social world, 
in the The laws of inheritance apply just as much 
SpCre^^^ to psychical characteristics as to physical; 

qualities that aid parents in the forms of social 
struggle are preserved and intensified in their descendants. 
In a stock of good farmers are found at length the 
qualities demanded by their occupation; and, when 
natural capacity is enforced by family tradition, the 
descendant of scholars or of statesmen may excel his 
parents in their chosen field. So many forces interfere 
with simple results like these, that their existence is 
often denied. The family of Bach, as musicians, of 
Adams, as statesmen, seem to be marked exceptions. 
The most careful investigation discovers that psychical 
ability has antecedents; that a family gradually lays 
the foundation of industrial, or intellectual, or ethical 
greatness ; although in its very success are many elements 
that threaten continued success. 

If development in the psychical sphere depended on 
biological heredity to preserve what had been won, it is 
hard to see how there could be any develop- 
Psychical What physical heredity fails to 

do is accomplished by a sorj^ of psychical 
heredity. The son’s character and ability depend quite 
as much on home training as on any natural gifts; the 
teacher’s enthusiasm kindles the love of learning in some 
mind which will penetrate more deeply than his into the 
secrets of science; the assistant physician, attending for 
years upon a master’s work, can at length achieve yet 
more wonderful results. In a country where scholarship 
is honoured and fostered, the results of physical as well as 


236 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


of this so-called psychical heredity are preserved as the 
basis of higher intellectual developments; and new 
variations which increase a scholar’s power are preserved. 
The mantle of statesman or artist falls 011 the apt pupil, 
in whom new variations with the inheritance of tried 
qualities make farther advance possible. 

If now we turn from the semi-biological ground of 
individualism to what is distinctly a matter of sociology, 
still much the same conditions are found. 
The Multi- OToups which are the proper organs of 

Social Groups social life show the same tendency to multiply 
leads to beyond the actual need for them; and in the 
struggle struggle that ensues slight variations from the 
them form determine the relative strength or 

weakness of the new forms. Here multiplica¬ 
tion beyond need leads to competition; variation within 
narrow limit is the basis of selection and so of develop¬ 
ment. In the industrial world facts of this class are 
almost too familiar to need illustration. Indeed, the 
very word which we have been using to denote human 
struggle, the word competition, is taken from the industrial 
sphere. In a time of prosperity, stores and factories 
multiply beyond the normal need of society; all sorts of 
new industrial schemes are set on foot; the unavoidable 
result sooner or later is a sharp struggle in which only 
the strongest industrial groups can maintain themselves. 
The new factories may some of them have been able to 
combine better machinery and better business methods 
with what has, been found good in previous trials; in 
that case the new variety is better adapted to the con¬ 
ditions of industrial success, and is “ selected ” by showing 
itself the stronger. 

To take an example from the intellectual activity of 
society, we may consider the planting of colleges, or 
indeed of churches, in a territory that is being rapidly 
settled. In the West states are interested in higher 
education as part of the state school system; individuals 


237 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 

are interested in higher education; different religious 
denominations are interested in education as an element 
in Christian training. Colleges are planted by these 
different parties in such number as to more than meet 
any present demand on the part of students; so large a 
number may or may not be a good thing for the interests 
of education, in any case it inevitably leads to sharp 
competition for students and for funds. 

Perhaps the greatest advances in social development 
have been along the line of greater stability; and this 
has ordinarily been attained by a shifting of 
principle of multiplication and variation 
Variation which we now are studying. The best example 

leading to of this is in the political sphere, though the 

^^thin\\e change is taking place elsewhere. Among 

Social Group, ravage races political activity consists in a 
struggle of tribe with tribe, in which new 
political units are ever being formed in considerable 
number and the weaker are disappearing entirely in the 
struggle to maintain themselves. Greece and Pome alike 
grappled unsuccessfully with the principle of stable 
government, and modern states have been brought to the 
verge of destruction by blindness to the same principle. 
To-day, however, it is generally recognised that stability 
may be secured by permitting growth from within. The 
multiplication of groups that stand for new political 
ideas is encouraged within the state; what could once 
only be accomplished by a revolution and overthrow of 
the existing government is accomplished by a change of 
party, the multiplication of political groups that leads 
to struggle is no longer multiplication of states, but a 
subordinate principle of growth within the state. The 
same change in the place of multiplication and variation 
of groups is appearing in intellectual life, in social life, 
and in economic life; and the consequence is that these 
forms of struggle are undergoing a profound change with 
reference to the permanence of the social structure. 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


The Multi¬ 
plication of 
Ideas and 
Ideals ; 
Psychical 
Struggle. 


238 

As the conditions of struggle and selection rise into 
the really psychical sphere, they may be studied simply 
as the multiplication of new institutions, new 
ideals, new motive-ideas. In fact, the rise of 
new groups in any form of social activity is 
always due in some measure to the rise of 
new ideas, and the higher the society, the 
more it depends on new ideas. In the 
psychical life of society is found the ultimate source of 
the conditions that lead to social struggle; such being 
its source, we cannot expect that social struggle will 
ever disappear. 

In the biological world, multiplication and heredity, 
with slight variations, led to struggle and the possibility 
of selection. Considered from various stand- 
Resume : ^ points, exactly the same conditions are fulfilled 
tions of human society, and it seems inevita.ble 

struggle and that the multiplication of individuals lead to 
Selection are struggle between them; that the multipli- 

present in nation of individuals in the same form of 
Human . , . . i t 

Society. social activity, seeking the same ends, trans¬ 
form the activity into a struggle; that the 
multiplication of groups for the same function, with the 
multiplication of the institutions and ideas for which 
the groups stand, result in a struggle of group with 
group. The new factors that enter into the struggle 
differ slightly from the earlier factors, so that struggle 
becomes a means of selection between the ‘"varieties,” 
and the “fittest” survive. 


OHAPTER XIY. 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 
{Continued.) 


Having seen that the conditions of struggle and selection 
are present in the distinctly human world, we may go 
B struggle consider the facts of struggle, and then 

and Selection of selection more in detail. The conditions 
in Human of Struggle are all but universal in society, 
Society. social activity may be considered 

from this standpoint. Even writers who regard society 
as an organism, point out a degree of competition between 
different functions and organs in the animal organism, 
and profess no surprise that wdth the less rigid structure 
of society, this competition or struggle becomes a far 
more important phase of all activity. It will be con¬ 
venient for us to consider the forms of social activity 
that were described in an earlier chapter as forms of 
social struggle, and then to examine the different planes 
of social struggle, and the different ends by which it is 
dominated. 

It .needs no second glance to satisfy one that the 
conditions considered in the last chapter render the 
1 Economic ^^^^omic activity of society what is fittingly 
Activity as called a struggle. Follow some industrial 
a struggle product—as economists are wont to do— 
for Existence. fpQjji the factory up to the time when it is 
“consumed.” The manufacturer of cotton goods chooses 
between competing places for hils factory; the makers 


240 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


of his machinery are struggling with each other to 
produce most economically engines, looms, &c., that are 
best adapted to his work; raw products he buys from 
sellers competing in the open market; labour he hires 
from among men who bid against each other for his 
work; transportation companies compete with one 
another in cheaply transferring his goods to market; 
and in’ the market, seller is struggling with seller for 
the privilege of a sale with profit; buyer and seller 
bargain together, to agree on a price. The present 
century has seen barrier after barrier swept away, till 
the whole world enters more or less freely into the one 
struggle; family and social distinctions are being oblit¬ 
erated in the industrial world; customs and laws in 
restraint of trade have been set aside. 

The result of this sudden expansion of the industrial 
struggle is to force more clearly on thinkers the fact 
that civilisation moves, not away from 
struggle, but to new forms of struggle. And 
the efforts to deal with the many difficulties 
which have arisen from this sudden change, 
make it clear that it is not by seeking to 
prevent struggle, but by modifying its forms, 
that progress will be made. Strikes are 
ordered and settled—in the presence, it may be, of 
military power—merely to leave the industrial life of 
a community a blank; the only genuine settlement of 
industrial difficulties has been gained when both sides 
were ready to listen to reason, and thus to elevate the 
clashing of interests to this higher plane. Labourers 
who suffered cruelly in an unequal struggle, have won 
their rights by combining and entering the struggle as 
a larger unit — but only when they could shift the 
contest to a higher plane than that of brute force, and 
gain the sympathy of the community in their behalf. 
Groups of co-operating buyers have united to do away 
with the petty competition of retail stores, by elevating 


Progress, 
not from 
Struggle, 
but to 
Higher 
Forms of 
Struggle. 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 241 

competition to a more reasonable plane. Nor are the 
greatest monopolies of the day altogether free from the 
higher forms of pressure in the economic struggle, uncon¬ 
trolled as they may often seem for a time. 

“ Social ” activity means social struggle. Normally, 
the struggle of class with class on this line is not so 
2. “Social” intense as the economic struggle, yet the 
Activity as same forces which have been removing 
a struggle geographical and political and social barriers 
for Existence, economic world, have also been at 

work in the “ social ” world. In particular, the extension 
of the ballot, with the new idea of rights which goes 
with the ballot, and the increasing respect for the power 
that goes with wealth, have done much to break down 
old social lines. And when once the position of a class 
or an individual is questioned, it must constantly be 
asserted. Thus the struggle between social classes is 
intensified, the effort on the part of each family to secure 
“ social position ” becomes very earnest, and all social 
intercourse intensifies the struggle for position. In many 
parts of the earth, the contact of different races has 
roused social ambitions in the one, and hatreds in the 
other, till the very structure of society is threatened. 
The determining factor in this contest was once a 
military force that assigned each man his •place; the 
social power which all men recognise to-day is the power 
of wealth; still it is growing clearer that the real power 
behind the army and behind the wealth is intellectual, 
and it is on this plane of intellectual powder that social 
recognition is to be sought in the future. 

With all the modification that civilisation brings, the 
struggle for females still remains as a competition 
between men for the hand of a desired wife. An 
“ attractive ” woman is one whose society many seek 
and enjoy; the favoured suitor is he who best meets 
the woman’s ideal of a husband. The contest remains, 
though it has been elevated from the domain of physical 
K 


242 ■ INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 

force, and from the domain of a parent’s power, to the 
sphere of choice. 

The contest between states for power is the earliest 
kind of human struggle to attract attention, and in the 

3 Political struggle to 

Activity as a leave the purpose of destruction and the plane 
struggle for of physical force. It should never be forgotten, 
Existence, however, that to-day it is the least important 
part of the contest between states which receives so much 
of public attention. The phrase “balance of power” 
may be no political ideal, but it expresses the statesman’s 
recognition that the contest of states is something far 
more than the military form of this contest. Each state 
holds its own with reference to every other state by their 
consent and its power to win their consent; and the 
external life of the state is a constant effort to increase 
its relative power and thus to raise its relative position. 
War may become less frequent, and men may fondly 
dream that it can be abolished. If this goal is ever 
attained, it will not be by putting an end to international 
contests, but by raising these contests to a higher and 
more rational plane. The fact of international struggle 
is simply the fact of international life. 

Within the state the contest of smaller political units 
(towns or • states ”) for power is generally not important 
The struggle when localities and political parties 

between coincide. In the United States the interests 
Lesser Politi- of North and South may come into apparent 
cal Units. conflict, and lead to the bitterest civil war; 
“silver” states may be at variance with “capitalist” 
states, agricultural with manufacturing states—but this 
is not a contest with reference to the relative power of 
these political sub-units so much as a contest of interests 
and of parties. Within the state the most important 
form of political struggle is the struggle between political 
parties. Their contest for power reaches from the 
smallest district to the whole nation. It is carried on 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 243 


not only in the election of officers, but in the administra¬ 
tion of government and the legislation of assemblies. 
The party of the majority is the power behind the 
throne, and other parties are supposed to hold the first 
party to its true task even by their opposition. The 
very life of the modern state depends on the struggle 
of parties; progress consists in the elevation of this 
struggle out of the sphere of physical force into the 
sphere of reason; and in so far as this form of struggle 
is civilised and its plane elevated, it becomes the fit 
instrument for the expression of the people’s will. 

Each of the forms of struggle that have just been 
considered, rises at times to the social or rational plane, 
4 Psychical properly called psychical. The 

Life as In- appeal to force does remain in the background, 
volving and is a factor that cannot be neglected; but 
struggle. have seen examples of political parties 

based on principles, we have known economic and social 
struggles to be raised to the intellectual plane, and to be 
settled at the bar of the people’s reason. The tendency 
to bring down all psychical questions into the sphere of 
brute force, • or, at least, to settle them by numerical 
majorities of unthinking voters, is a danger likely to 
become quite as great in the future as in the past. Yet 
contests of ideas and of ideals belong to the very nature 
of psychical life, and we could not avoid them even if 
foolishly we would. 

The intellectual life of a people is vigorous when new 
ideas are brought forward in prolific abundance, and 
sharply criticised. As for example one man 
Str^^gir^^ has urged the view that the seat of the race 
’ was originally at the North Pole, another has 
claimed that his lymph would cure consumption, and still 
others are urging that the adoption of a silver monetary 
standard, or the control of industry by the state, would 
be a panacea for social and economic evils. The attempt 
may be made to settle such questions by force, as Galileo 


244 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


was cast into prison, and as advocates of the theory of 
evolution have been solemnly damned for all eternity. 
But when they are fairly discussed and judged by the 
standard of truth, the severest standard by which they 
can be judged, the intellectual contest over such ideas is 
the mark of intellectual life and intellectual progress. 

Sometimes the form of struggle under discussion is 
described as a contest of ideas themselves, but the value 
The Contest figure of Speech is, to say the least, 

over New questionable. The process is somewhat as 
Ideas. follows. One man, or it may be several men 

contemporaneously, perceives the inadequacy of an ac¬ 
cepted belief. He states the truth in a new and larger 
form, and seeks to persuade the world that his statement 
is correct. Darwin finds that the principle of natural 
selection explains in a new and more satisfactory way 
the facts as to the origin of species. At first only a few, 
whose thoughts had all but anticipated Darwin’s, are 
ready to accept the view thus propounded. The little 
group win new adherents by urging their belief on 
popular attention; the statement of its views is slightly 
modified as farther light is thrown on the question. 
After more than a generation has passed, the fundamental 
principle is generally accepted, and the contest is con¬ 
tinued between those who believe in the inheritance of 
acquired characteristics and the party who follow the 
lead of Weismann in denying it. The spread of 
education among the people has extended the number 
of those who engage in discussions of scientific questions, 
and has given rise to new dangers; but, provided the 
discussion can be conducted on its proper plane, the 
widening of the intellectual struggle will be a widening 
and deepening of intellectual life. 

All progress in ethics and in art is due to the same 
principle. In a world which found slavery convenient 
and useful, the struggle in behalf of the new conception 
of humanity had to be prosecuted nearly two thousand 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 245 

years before it could finally win. Wherever ethical life 
Ethical and vigorous, the war against the slaveholder 
Artistic Life was sharpest; and, when the battle was won 
involves by reason, ancestral custom and economic 

Strufi’crlG* • 

interest could not long hold out against 
emancipation. Standards of right in business and in 
politics are being sharply criticised to-day. The struggle 
is sharper because these particular standards have fallen 
behind the real ethical standard of the day; but the man 
or the party who represents a standard either in advance 
of public opinion, or behind public opinion, has the same 
sort of struggle to engage in. The effort to secure a 
wiser treatment of the dependent class, the agitation in 
favour of uniform and more strict marriage laws, the 
temperance movement, are different forms of the struggle 
for ethical standards in the life of the community. When 
John Howard discovered the evils, sanitary and moral, 
which characterised the prisons of France and of all 
Europe, it was no easy task to secure a higher standard 
for the treatment of prisoners. A life was spent and 
sacrificed in the cause of reform before much was accom¬ 
plished; and, after more than a century, the contest is 
still being waged between those who are content with lax 
methods and the party that demands a radical reformation 
in the treatment of criminals. Each new proposition as 
to conduct, each new ideal, has to win its way on grounds 
of reason; and when the ethical life of a society is 
vigorous, the contests may be intense and prolonged. 
The special intensity of the ethical struggle is due to the 
fact that each party believes it stands for the right; 
conscience is enlisted on each side, and the very basis 
of right itself seems to be at stake. The contest is 
carried on by parties, and, it may be, their strength is 
occasionally tested by vote ; but it is really a question as 
to principles, and the real conclusion can only be reached 
on the ground of reasonable discussion. 

Nor is the sphere of religion exempt from conflict. 


246 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


Parties and schools of thought in the Eoman Church, 

, sects as well as schools in the Protestant 
struggle as c. nn j i 

the Principle Church, are signs of the effort to grasp truth 

of Develop- on different sides, and so to reach a deeper 
ment m knowledge of God. Questions as to the 
Eehgion. state, the authority and inspiration 

of the scriptures, and the apostolic succession, are dis¬ 
cussed, sometimes it is true with bitterness, and yet 
with a genuine desire to reach the truth. Many a 
religion has been propagated by the sword, and the 
power of the majority vote is still invoked in some 
churches to determine what the truth must be, and what 
the right shall be. On the lower plane, struggle is 
divisive, and a hindrance to the work of the church; and 
yet struggle is as necessary for religious life and religious 
growth as it is for advance in any other line. Here again 
the only question is with reference to the plane on which 
struggle shall be conducted. 

In considering the forms of social activity as forms of 
struggle, it has not been possible to overlook the fact 
Change in struggle in human society is undergoing a 

the Form of most important change. Like all other social 
struggle. phenomena, it grows more complex as new 
forms arise out of the old simpler forms; but the change 
that has been forced on our attention is more important 
than any change in outward form. Social struggle 
changes its entire character as it is raised from the 
physical to the psychical plane, as it is actuated by social 
rather than biological ends, and as the units which enter 
into it become really human units. 

Even among animals, what we call “ brute force ” is by 
no means the only factor that determines the survivor; 
Physical Struggle is primarily a physical struggle 

struggle in in which the survivor grows fat and the 
Human weaker dies. With the development of human 
Society. society, this side of struggle is only gradually 
forced into the background. In economic life, slavery 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 247 

rested on the confessed basis of superior force, and even 
to-day the strike is often intended as a trial of strength 
between employer and employed. It is only dreamers 
who look forward to anything like the elimination of 
war in the near future. Even in the intellectual and 
the religious sphere the ballot is invoked as the power 
of the majority, rather than the power of reason. 
Germany undertakes to assimilate Alsace-Lorraine, as 
the German element in Austria-Hungary attempted to 
denationalise certain other elements of the population, 
by forcing its language and its institutions on the con¬ 
quered people. 

Struggle on the physical plane continues in the most 
advanced forms of human society, but it is gradually 
struggle being supplanted by struggle on a higher 
raised to plane. Cunning stratagem and the strength 
the Psychical comes from union are important factors 
in the struggle of animals, and in the case of 
primitive man they become the decisive factors. As 
society develops, the slave gives way to the serf, and the 
serf to the hired servant, in economic life. The state 
gains many of its ends from other states by diplomatic 
means, and, where this fails, some questions are settled 
by arbitration. The Spanish Inquisition is gone, and the 
newspaper in some measure takes its place. On the 
higher plane, struggle is certainly more general; rightly 
understood, it is keener than it could have been on the 
lower plane. At the same time, .however, a spirit of 
harmony often exists between contending parties, as 
between knight-errants of old, and it is more evident 
than ever before that struggle is the normal form of 
development. 

Its Aim comes struggle in human society is raised from 
to be not De- the physical to the psychical plane, a new 
struction but gud or purpose controls those who engage in 
Supremacy. whole character is changed. In 

the really human struggle for existence, the aim is 


248 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


not destruction but supremacy; man looks beyond the 
immediate present, be seeks not so much to meet his 
needs as to provide a way by which he and those who 
work with him may have their needs met regularly in 
the future. The difference to which I refer is the 
difference between the hunter and the herdsman, between 
the race that eats the bananas provided by nature and 
the race that cultivates wheat. The one destroys what 
he touches, the other becomes master of it and makes it 
subservient to his future needs. The one acts irrationally 
and independently of society, the other rationally, on the 
basis of society and for society. 

So in the struggle of man with man, the aim comes to 
be not destruction but supremacy. Savage man may be 
, more cunning, and better able to unite with 
and Rational, his neighbour, and better able to profit by his 
Human, neighbour’s experience, than even the higher 
stTiT^ le animals, but in the struggle of man with man 
the aim is to destroy adversaries, and pre¬ 
sumably to eat them. Very early in human history the 
truly human, rational, form of struggle must have begun, 
but the traces of it among savage races are hardly to be 
found, and its progress with the passing centuries has 
been slow enough at best. As it has gradually supplanted 
the lower, animal, type of struggle, the foundations of 
civilisation have been laid, and the reign of reason has 
begun. The man struggles with other men in many 
diverse lines that he may win supremacy, while he and 
they alike profit from the new relation. The captive is 
retained as a slave, and then as a servant; in later times 
tribute is exacted, and the conquered people is left as a 
source of revenue; at length it is enough that the 
authority of the conqueror be recognised, and the con¬ 
quered race is admitted to all the privileges of citizen¬ 
ship. In the first instance the conquered remain, but 
their civic life is destroyed; the exaction of tribute 
cripples the independent existence of the conquered race, 


249 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 

and brings no lasting benefit to the conqueror; but when 
at length the conquered race can be fused into the life 
of the superior race, the foundations of future greatness 
may be securely laid. The struggle for wealth follows 
much the same course as the struggle for power. First, 
destruction tf the fortunate to secure his good feeding- 
grounds; then repeated pillagings, destroying crops, but 
leaving those who will raise more; then a regular tribute, 
or an effort to secure this by taxing imports; and, finally, 
free commerce, for at length men recognise that this is 
the surest way for even the stronger to secure wealth. 
The new form of struggle deserves the name social, 
because it depends on present social conditions, and aims 
to extend rather than to destroy them. It is called 
rational, because it keeps in view the future as well as 
the present, and pursues the lines which will in the end 
be most sure to make society more human and more 
reasonable. 

Finally the change in the form of struggle modifies the 
competing units. The change from groups determined 
by territorial lines, to groups determined by 
Change in the lines, has already been discussed in the 

Units as preceding chapter, and I need only refer to it 
struggle is once more at this point. Struggle on the 
raised to the lower physical plane is carried on between 
Plane^^^^ units that may be called physical; it makes 
little difference whether they are individuals 
or groups that find their unity in some physical cause 
(kinship or locality). The social group, in a more strict 
sense of the term, the true element in human society, 
arises in struggle on the psychical plane; and its 
character becomes more distinct and definite as human 
struggle assumes its proper forju. The change from 
lower to higher stages in the development of society is 
often described as the growth of individualism, and the 
new duties and rights of the individual in the economic 
or the political world are brought in as evidence. The 


250 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


truth is that a simple struggle between simple groups is 
being succeeded by a complex struggle between different 
kinds of units. The individual is freed from number¬ 
less territorial and social limitations that hampered and 
protected him, but the competition in which he engages 
is limited in a new way. Not only does increasing 
differentiation effectively limit the number with whom 
he competes, but much of the burden of struggle is 
shifted from the shoulders of the isolated individual to 
the group of which he is a member. Group competes 
with group, and the individual competes only with the 
other members of the group. The human family shields 
its members from nil the rest of the world, but even 
here an emulation within the bonds of affectionate union 
is a source of strength. The town removes some phases 
of the struggle for existence from each citizen, the state 
removes many others; but within each political unit 
other ends call out the energy of the individual citizen. 
The manufacturer, in competing with other manufacturing 
groups, removes from his workmen much of the stress of 
economic struggle, but, within definite lines, the workman 
has only the more bitter a battle to fight. In the higher 
form of social activity, the simple conflict of physical 
groups is supplanted by an exceedingly complex struggle, 
in which each individual and the group uniting to 
perform each phase of social activity, are the units that 
rise or fall according to their fitness. 


In the consideration of social struggle, which has thus 
far occupied our attention, it has been tacitly assumed 
c Survival outcome of struggle is the survival 

of the Fittest fittest, inasmuch as it was shown in 

as the Out- the preceding chapter that the ’conditions 
come of which cause survival of the fittest are present 
struggle. truly human world, as much as in the 

physical world. It is true that the definition of “ fittest ” 
has constantly changed, as struggle has been raised to 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 251 

higher planes. Strength and speed once constituted 
fitness; they have been supplanted by cunning and 
alertness, and these in turn by intellectual keenness 
and the power of association. The environment'of man 
has grown far more complex with civilisation, and with 
the standard of fitness the surviving kind has changed. 
None the less, the law of natural selection remains the 
same for man as for the biological organism; the fittest 
show their character by surviving in the struggle for 
existence, struggle is a process of selection, and so of 
progress. The law applies, not alone to individual men, 
but to all the units that multiply with slight variation 
and compete in the social world. Individual men are 
“ selected,” as fitter for their place than their competitors. 
The fittest group in each form of social struggle shows 
its fitness by surviving, and with the group survive and 
are perpetuated its institutions. Language, and philo¬ 
sophy, and ethics, the form of state or of the family 
that make their respective groups “ fittest,” are the 
institutions that survive and are perpetuated, and their 
authority is the outcome of their success. 

The survival of the fittest can best be understood by 
1. Survival ^ study of the units that survive. I speak, 
of the Fittest therefore, of the survival of individuals, of 
Individuals, groups, and of institutions (using the word 
“ institution ” in a broad sense). 

The contest and survival of individuals is an out¬ 
growth of struggle and survival in the biological world. 
Biologically never entirely loses its 

the less Fit original character. In the competition of or- 
perish, the ganisms, those best adapted to given physical 
Fittest conditions survive and multiply their kind; 
survive. fPgease, famine, and beasts of prey destroy the 
less fit. The same forces have not lost their power to 
destroy the less fit among men. Consumption, fever, or 
malaria find a footing in weaker constitutions; and we 
know the survivors to be “ tougher,” from the fact that they 


252 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


survive. Hunger and want and cold do not permit the 
more delicate to live; the fittest to meet these conditions 
survive longest. The beast of prey, and man’s most cruel 
enemy, who is man himself, catch the weaker, the faint¬ 
hearted, the head that is not cool. The young men enlisted 
in France in 1894^ were said to he a finer set of men 
physically than had ever been examined in that country 
before. It is said that a generation after any of the great 
wars of Europe, the population horn of those who survived 
the .war has been of higher grade than before or after. 

In the case of man, another factor is more important 
here than the mere continuation of the individual’s life. 
The “Fit- Under different physical and social conditions, 
test” Type man’s rate of increase differs as does that of 
increases other animal. The survival of a type of 

most rapidly, depends mainly on the relative 

number of children brought to maturity by those who 
represent that type. As Lapouge has pointed out,^ if 
we suppose a difference in the number of mature off¬ 
spring of three in one family to four in another, and 
suppose this difference to be kept up, in the fifth 
generation the offspring of one family will number more 
than three times those of the other. And if we suppose 
the influence of a higher death-rate to be added to the 
influence of a lesser birth-rate, it becomes evident that 
one type of man may all but disappear before a type 
that is physically superior, in a very few generations. 
Perhaps it is quite unnecessary to remind the reader 
that the “ fittest ” type from this physical standpoint 
is not the highest type socially, or intellectually, or 
morally; nor yet is it the lowest. In Germany, the 
peasant class is called the basis of society; in every 
country, the future of the nation depends primarily on 
that class which raises up men to inherit its culture, 
and to carry on its work. 

^ V. Ammon, Die Gesellschaftsordnung und Hire natiirliche Grund- 
lageii. S. 238. ^ l^evue Internationale de Sociologie, I. 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 253 


The “Fit¬ 
test” Type 
rises in 
Social 
Struggles. 


In the truly human struggle, comparatively few indi¬ 
viduals are thrown together in each form of struggle, 
and the end is not mere survival, but social 
survival. I mean that man seeks not only 
to get food, but to secure a better and better 
economic position He show’s himself to be 
“more fit” by surviving and having children, 
hut also by holding his place, and securing a higher place 
in society as the outcome of struggle. The printer’s boy 
advances by common sense, pluck, and skill, till he can set 
up for himself; the small office becomes a large printing 
establishment; and at length the successful printer 
ventures in the field of publishing, where the same 
qualities win him success a second time. In all his 
struggle, in all human struggle, the aim is “social” 
survival; he shows his fitness for the difficult and 
delicate duties of high position, and being the fittest, 
he survives all his competitors by rising out of the 
lower kind of competition. 

The actual outcome of the social process in which the 
more fit tend to survive and multiply (physical survival 
Social fittest), and, at the same time, to rise to 

Apparatus higher positions in society (social survival of 
for determin- the fittest), depends largely on the organisa- 
ingthe of a given society. In order to attain 

the FUtesf necessary unity and rigidity, a society 

(unconsciously) sets close limits to its con¬ 
stituent classes. The exceedingly unfit may be thrown 
out of a given class, but there is no regular channel by 
which the better man can rise to the position for which 
he is adapted. Eigid barriers, once useful to society, 
have now been quite generally removed; and with the 
removal of barriers has constantly been associated a more 
or less definite apparatus for weeding out the unfit, and 
advancing those who are fit for better things. In the 
contest for industrial position, the labourer who can 
most economically perform a given task is the only one 


254 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


to whom an employer can afford to give that task. 

Each industrial crisis constitutes a severe test 
„ for every one in the industrial world; the 
Apparatus l^ss fit are thrown out of their place, at what- 
for determin- ever point in the industrial world their place, 
ing the so-called “ out of work ” class 

the fittest dimply consists of those whose work cannot 
be utilised, either temporarily or permanently. 
During periods of industrial expansion, the man of 
wisdom, skill, and vigour, expects advancement, because 
new positions are being created, for which these are the 
only recommendation. In the economic struggle, advance¬ 
ment and testing for fitness are partially separated by the 
present type of social organisation. In “social” inter¬ 
course harriers are rather more rigid, and the apparatus 
for determining the survival of the fittest is less fully 
developed. ^Nevertheless, marked cases of unfitness are 
weeded out of their class, and disapprobation, expressed 
in many forms, drives them elsewhere. Conversely, 
those who are endowed with truly social gifts of bright¬ 
ness, friendliness, and delicate perception, find a welcome 
in social circles called higher than their own, and rise by 
the admiration they command. 

In political life, the facts of sur\dval and of failure to 
survive, the machinery for advancing the better and weed- 
Apparatus for poorer, cannot escape the observer’s 

determining notice. Take, for example, the German army.^ 
Survival in The number competing for each position seems 
Political Life, ^^duly large. An officer is thrown out of his 
command for what would seem a trivial failure—some 
lack in a parade, for which he has only the remotest 
responsibility, some jealousy on the part of fellow-officers, 
some harsh word that rankles in the mind of a subordinate. 
Undoubtedly many excellent soldiers are thrown out by 
such methods. The result, however, is that only the most 

^ Cf. Ammon, Die Gesellschaftsordnung und Hire naturliche Grund- 
lagen. Ss. 226 sqq. 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 


255 


cautious, the wisest, the most courageous, are advanced. 
Compared with a system where seniority, pure and simple, 
is the test of fitness, the superiority of the German system 
is only too apparent. Or, if we look at the English Civil 
Service system, we find an elaborate apparatus set up by 
society, to throw out candidates for office who lack some 
simple qualifications, and to advance to severer tests 
those who have these qualifications. In other countries, 
where the fitness of those appointed to office seems 
wholly lacking, the explanation is found in the social 
apparatus for determining who are the fit. Good fellow¬ 
ship, political trickery, and cunning, some reciprocal 
service to the appointing power — these and similar 
qualifications too commonly constitute the test of fitness, 
by which a nation permits candidates for office to rise or 
fall. Men gain political office, or lose it, as they are 
adapted to present conditions. A society determines 
what it approves, and establishes a particular apparatus 
for advancing the approved, and throwing out the dis¬ 
approved ; it is a law of nature that those deemed fittest 
survive. The key to the part this process plays in pro¬ 
gress is found in the contest of nation with nation, in 
which those with false standards of fitness cannot long 
survive. 

In the psychical life of society, finally, the same truth 
holds good. The individual’s position in the intellectual 

. ■ 1 ^ world, in the world of art, or morals, of 

Survival of ’ . i 1 , ’ i 

Individuals religion, IS determined by his adaptation as 

in Psychical judged by the social standard. The process 
begins in the schools. Those who fail to do 
the work in the lower school and the “ grammar school ” 
successfully, do not go on to the “ high school ”; those 
who fail or lose interest in the high school and “academy,” 
do not go on to the college and the university. The fact 
that examinations are passed successfully, opens the way 
to higher opportunities; those who have shown themselves 
fit are advanced, while those who are thrown oat must 


256 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 

work at a considerable disadvantage, if they wonld win 
position in the literary or educational world. The law of 
nature is that the fittest man survives and rises. Society, 
however, determines the standard of fitness, and the social 
standard constantly needs revising, that it may do its 
work properly. The penalty for the society that persists 
in judging by a false standard, will appear as we go on to 
consider the fate of social groups in the struggle for 
existence. 

The struggle of group with group repeats the story of 
survival and of destruction. The simple groups of un- 
„ « . , -civilised life—the tribe or the “horde”—can 

2. Survival of 

Social Groups only survive by proving their fitness to given 
in the conditions. Some savage genius introduces 
struggle for ^ organisation and a strenuous rule, 

before which surrounding tribes can make 
no resistance. Then the central power decays, and no 
part has such fitness that it can assume the leadership. 
Still in this repeated process is the possibility and the 
hope of progress, for each new leader brings some slight 
“variation,” and if the “varieties” prove better fitted to 
the conditions, and are preserved, they form a starting- 
point for future, still more fit, varieties. 

The simple struggle of savage tribes has become a 
contest of nations, but the result is the same. The fittest 
prove their fitness in the struggle, and survive. Eome 
was the fittest to conquer and to rule, and the world 
became the Eoman World. The superior strength of 
Germany twenty-five years ago proved that her social 
and military organisation were better fitted to existing 
conditions than were those of France. A nation’s 
strength, its power to survive, is determined by its 
relative fitness to the conditions of modern national life. 
The fittest nation survives, gains in power, and helps to 
shape the' future conditions of political life. 

In fact, it is in the contest of group with group that 
the law of survival works out the gradual improvement 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 257 


Survival 


of social organisation. The point where a society is 
most severely tested is its organisation, and 
of Fittest slight superiority here counts for much. On 
Group is the the lower stages of social development it may 
Survival of be simply the rigidity of a tribe under able 

the Fittest command that makes it strong—as Bagehot 
Social Or- , . ° ® 

ganisation. ^as shown in his brilliant essays—and later, an 

element of flexibility adds greater strength. 
The apparatus for determining the survival and advance¬ 
ment of the fittest individuals is a most important 
element in the strength of a society. That society which 
first develops a system that utilises the gifts of in¬ 
dividuals, without weakening the structure of the group, 
gains an immense advantage over its competitors. A 
nation which, like Turkey to-day, refuses to use the 
talents men might have for statesmanship, can expect 
only a rotten existence, wholly dependent on the interests 
of foreign states. In a word, the standard of fitness 
which a group may set up for its members, determines 
which members shall survive and be advanced; but 
the group which sets up a low or false standard is 
itself condemned to failure in the contest of group with 
group. 

It is equally true that the particular form of organisa¬ 
tion in each separate mode of social activity is a source 
of added weakness and of added strength to 
the society as a whole. The development of 
the family was worked out in early times 
along this line. The recognition of the child’s 
connection with its mother as something more, 
and more lasting, than the physical connection 
with the source of its early food, helped to develop 
cohesion in the tribe. Later, the recognition of the 
father’s authority over his property, in the patriarchal 
family, was a firmer bond of union and a source of in¬ 
creased strength to those tribes that adopted it. The 
higher ideal of the monogamous family has finally won 
s 


Type of 
Family one 
element in 
the Fitness 
of a Sur¬ 
viving Group. 


258 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


its place because it is the basis of a deeper and truer 
national life than the forms that preceded it. The 
authority of the family-ideal lies in the fact that it has 
proved its fitness by lending strength to groups in the 
struggle for existence. 

The industrial organisation of society has in like 
manner proved the fitness of each stage of its develop¬ 
ment by the strength it has given to social 

Organisation groups in their struggle for existence. The 

an element tribe that kept its captives as slaves, could 

in the Fitness develop a far more complex and more per- 

of the Sur- jjianent organisation than the tribe that de- 
viving Group. ° 

stroyed its enemies in war. But when men 
had learned the power of application and self-control, 
slavery became a menace to the nation instead of a 
source of strength. By the same law that called it into 
being—the law that excellence of an industrial organisa¬ 
tion is tested by the strength it gives the group—by this 
same law the doom of slavery was pronounced. It made 
the nation weaker morally, industrially, physically; and 
this was most strikingly proved by the war of 1861 . 
The present industrial problems are being worked out 
on the same line, and the solutions offered are judged 
by the same test. Discontent among workmen and 
liability to strikes are sources of industrial weakness; 
oppression of isolated industrial groups, short-sighted 
monopolies that seek to reap quick harvests from ill- 
gotten power, excessive speculation, are sources of weak¬ 
ness ; corporations that use these methods are at a 
disadvantage in their contest with other industrial 
groups, and the nation where such methods prevail is 
at a disadvantage in competition with other nations. 
Solutions for these problems are offered, and in the 
industrial struggle they are tested, until at length the 
right solution has shown its authority by proving its 
fitness to make the industrial group and the nation 
strong. 


NA TURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 259 

Political life furnishes the clearest example of the 
principle under consideration. Political parties, if they 
Political pei’foi’nr at all their proper function, present 
Questions people clear issues on questions most 

decided by important to the nation’s life. The successful 
S^bfsur represents the nation’s decision on these 

viving Group. decision is proved wrong 

by the fact that it makes the nation weaker 
in the struggle for its position among the nations, the 
people have opportunity to change their decision. The 
party’s policy is judged first in the contest with other 
parties, and then in the contest of nation with nation; 
its correctness is shown by its power to make the nation 
strong and respected. According to this principle, the 
state has won its right to exercise authority, and the 
governed have won the right to protest against an unwise 
and unjust government. According to the same prin¬ 
ciple, questions as to the limits of state activity are 
being tested to-day. Men use argument to persuade the 
people that it is worth while for the state to attempt 
to extend the sphere of its activity; the question is 
temporarily decided in the Keichstag or in Parliament, 
but the real decision depends on the severe test of fitness 
in the struggle for existence. Whatever limit to state 
activity proves its fitness by making the nation strong, 
this limit may lay claim to truth. 

Once more, in the psychical sphere the questions of 
truth, and right, and beauty, are decided by the same 
test of fitness. The introduction and develop- 
o^Ei^htmade ^ Standard of right has already 

clear by the been described (p. 244). The contest of ideals 
Ideals of the is carried on at length by a contest of parties 
Group^^^^ representing ideals. The party which triumphs 
in the contest successfully asserts a temporary 
authority for its ideal; the real test comes, however, 
when the recognition of the ideal enforced by the success¬ 
ful party works out its effect in the life of the people. 


26 o 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


If the new ideal produces more earnest, more upright, 
truer men, if it binds families together in a deeper 
common life, if it makes men better citizens by kindling 
their devotion to the state, the new ideal proves its real 
authority by making the man, the family, the state, better 
fitted for the struggle of life. The religious man uses 
the old motto “ Vox populi, vox Dei ” in the deeper sense 
in which its truth cannot be questioned: God’s voice 
proclaims the right to each age and each people, in the 
ideal which makes that people best able to do its work in 


its own age. 

The test of truth and beauty is essentially the same. 
Men have tried in vain—first with military force, and 
then with the power of the ballot—to make 
BeaSy^made Propositions true. The immediate test of a 
clear by the new proposition is its acceptance by the few 
Survival of minds best qualified to express an opinion 
upon it. Every new opinion has to run a 
gauntlet in the learned world, and under 
criticism its strong points and its weak points are 
revealed. So every new departure in art has to justify 
itself to the art critics, and through them to the public. 
This is only the preliminary test of excellence. The 
new opinion in science requires the farther test of 
experience in its favour. It is true, if it makes the 
student better fitted to deal with the problems of science; 
true, if it leads to farther discovery and useful invention; 
true, if familiar facts receive new light and new meaning 
from it. The ultimate test is its manifested power to 
make men better fitted to deal with the objects of 
scientific study. And a new conception of beauty has 
not proved its right to be, by making a few converts 
among critics. When its power to stimulate and elevate 
the human soul has been demonstrated, when human 
life has been enriched by it, when it has made men 
better fitted for the work of life—then it may lay 
claim to beauty. 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 261 


In discussing the survival of the fittest in the struggle 
of social groups, I have almost inevitably spoken of the 
3 . Survival Survival of the fittest institutions, which have 
of the Fittest made the groups what they are. The general 
Institutions, social organisation, which makes a 

social group strong in the contest of groups, has proved 
its fitness by the survival of the group that it has 
characterised. So, too, each particular phase of social 
organisation is, as we have seen, a source of added 
strength or weakness. The form of industrial organ¬ 
isation in all its details, the type of the family and 
the class organisation in social life, the legal and political 
organisation of a society, the place it gives to psychical 
life and the forms of psychical life which are encouraged 
—all these phases of its life are the institutions in wiiich 
it finds strength or weakness. The struggle and survival 
of institutions is essentially the struggle of social groups 
and the survival of the groups which find strength in 
their institutions. The contest of ideas and ideals is 
essentially a contest of groups representing ideas 01 
ideals; and in the success and survival of the group, 
the ideas are proved true or false. 

It is important to form a clear idea of the process 
of “ survival ” for social institutions, as well as for all 
The Process icleals and ideas, because this is the mannei 
of “Survival” in which every reform must win its success, 
of Social 13P0 process by which ethical and intellectual 
Institutions. develops. Each new phase of social life, 
each new line of thought or of conduct, must first prove 
its excellence to the few^ who are fitted to judge it, and 
through them to the people generally. The new and 
the old first compete for the approval of the individual 
mind; apostles of the new urge its claims upon all 
who will listen; if the new phase of social life passes 
this test successfully, it becomes incorporated in the life 
of a people, and its fortunes are identified with the 
people’s fortunes. Then comes the second test the test 


262 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


by the effect on the people’s life. A¥hat helps the people 
to survive, ultimately proves its “fitness” by surviving. 
The new “variety” survives, if it is the fittest, {a) by 
appealing to individual reason, and {b) by proving its 
adaptation in the fact that it makes the social group 
better equipped in the struggle with other groups. 

The manner in which each social institution has thus 
been born of struggle, explains both its authority and 
Authority claim to stability. A particular govern- 

and stability ment, SO the science of politics asserts, has 
of Social authority over its people, because it is an 
Institutions, institution that has proved its right to exer¬ 
cise authority in the severest kind of struggle, by the 
severest test by which it could be tested. It continues 
to exercise authority rightfully, just so long as it con¬ 
tinues to meet the requirements of this test. Its stability 
depends on its relative justification to the minds of 
critics, and its ultimate justification in that it makes 
the nation strong to meet its difficulties and to fulfil 
its tasks. Or, again, in the theory of knowledge, the, 
authority of truth and its unchanging character depend 
on the struggle in which truth must originally assert 
its power, and continually reassert it. “ Materialistic,” 
“idealistic,” and “critical” views of the world each 
claim to be true. The first test is power to command 
the assent of thinkers, ,the second is the test of life. 
Any truth that passes these tests lias enduring authority, 
and the particular statement of that truth has authority 
so long as it meets these tests. Such an institution as 
the “public school,” such an ideal as that of true 
charity to classes that become dependent, derives its 
authority from the two-fold struggle in which it 
prevails; and so long as it meets the test, it produces 
stability, and rightfully exercises authority. 

The present account of the social authority and 
stability of institutions does not, however, at all exclude 
a principle of change. So soon as a new phase of social 


NATURAL SELECTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 263 

life—perhaps a new type of trade’s union, with more 
Principle of attention to the higher needs of workmen— 
Development claims recognition, the authority of the earlier 
in the phase must re-assert itself, or be supplanted, 
of Au^^rity Grreek legend, one dynasty of the gods falls 
’ before a new and stronger dynasty. Such is the 
history of ideals and institutions in the process of social 
development. New ideals, born of the old, assert superior 
authority; the good yields to the better; but the stability 
of truth and the authority of right remain unquestioned. 

“ Progress has been due to the opportunity of those 
individuals who are a little superior in some respects 
Progress by their fellows of asserting their superiority, 
the Survival and of continuing to live, and of promulgating, 
of the as an inheritance, that superiority.”^ The 

Fittest. doctrine of natural selection and the survival 

of the fittest in human society, represents simply the 
principle that those types best fitted to live are the ones 
that survive. Tliis principle it applies, not to individuals 
alone, but also to social groups and to the ideals and 
institutions which social groups represent. In the simple 
principle of selection, the modern science of society finds 
the key to social development. In biology, selection 
meant development of new and higher types, because the 
conditions of life were constantly changing; and the rise 
of new biological types was the basis for yet more 
complex and higher types of plants and animals. In 
human society, the principle of selection becomes in truth 
a principle of progress, because the development of higher 
social types produces those conditions which make yet 
higher types possible. As the conditions of social ex¬ 
istence become, not only more complex, but also more 
truly human, the type of the “best adapted” becomes 
higher; with each step in development is given the 
stimulus to a farther and higher development. 

1 Professor Flower, “Reply to an Address by the Trades Council, New¬ 
castle, September, 1889.” Quoted by Mr. B. Kidd, kiocial Evolution,!^. 34. 


264 INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 

Students of history have often sought to explain 
progress by pointing out the conditions of progress. The 
great lesson of the theory of natural selection, as applied 
to human society, is that it is not external conditions 
which account for progress. Eather in the selection of 
the better men, the better social groups, the better social 
institutions and ideals, the power of each social unit to 
utilise favourable conditions is developed and increased. 
The true key to progress is found in the development of 
the faculty to use the so-called external conditions of 
progress. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


This bibliography is intended simply as a list of the books 
which have been found useful in the preparation of the fore¬ 
going pages; I have, however, added the titles of six or eight 
books and articles which have come to my notice while the 
book was in press. It is arranged according to the chapters 
that have preceded, in order to guide the reader in farther 
research along the lines suggested. 


A. A. P. S. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social 
Science. 

A. J. S. American Journal of Sociology. 

I. J. E. International Journal of Ethics. 

P. I. S. Revue internationale de sociologie. Paris. 

Z. f. V. P. Zeitsehrift j'dr vergleichcnde Psychologie. 


GENERAL WORKS 

Ammon, 0 . Die Gesellschaftsordnung und Hire naturlichen Grundlagen. 
Jena, 1895. 

Bagehot, W. Physics and Politics. New York, 1876. 

Carey, H. C. Princiides of Social Science. Philadelphia, 1858-59. 
Comte, A. Cours de philosophic positive. Third Edition. Paris, 1869. 
Com-ad, Elster, Lexis und Loerning. Ilandwdrterbuch der Staatsivis- 
senschaften. 

Durkheim, E. De la division du travail social. Paris, 1893. 

Fonillee, A. La science sociale contemporaine. Paris, 1885. 

Giddings, F. H. “The Theory of Sociology.” Supplement, A. A. P. S. 
1894. 

The Principles of Sociology. New York and London, 1896. 
de Greef, G. Introduction a la sociologie. Bruxelles et Paris. I. 1886 ; 
11. 1889. 

Les lois sociologiques. 

Gumplowicz, L. Der Rassenkampf. Innsbruck, 1883. 

Grundriss der Sociologie. Wien, 1885. 

s 2 


266 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


Hansen, G. Die drei BevdlTcerungsstufen. Miinclien, 1889, 

Lilienfeld, P. v. Gedanlcen iiber die Sociahvissenschaft der ZuTcunft. 
Mitau, 1873-75. 

^Mackenzie, J. S. Introduction to Social riiilosophy. London and New 
York, 1890. 

Novicow, J. Les luttes entre societes humaines. Paris, 1893. 

Patten, S. N. “The Theory of Social Forces.” Supplement, A. A. P. S. 
1896. 

Schiiffle, A. Bau und Lehen des socialen Korpers. Tubingen, 1875-77. 
Simmel, G. Uber sociale Differenzieriing. Leipzig, 1890. 

S[>encer, H. Social Statics. London, 1851. 

First Principles of a New System of Philosophy, New York, 1874. 
Principles of Sociology. New York, 1891. 

Principles of Ethics. New York, 1892-93. 

Descriptive Sociology. New York, 1873-1881. 

Tarde, G. Les lois de Vimitation. Paris, 1890. 

La logique sociale. Paris, 1895. 

Tunnies, F. Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft. Leipzig, 1887. 

Ward, L. F. Dynamic Sociology. New York, 1883. 

The Psychic Factors of Civilization. Boston, 1893. 

See also the various Culturgeschichten published in Germany, also dis¬ 
cussions of Ethics (especially those by Hblfding, Paulsen, and Wundt), 
and of the Philosophy of History. 


HIBLIOGRAPHY FOR THE INTRODUCTION 

I. Sociology the Study of the Society or Social Group 

Espinas, A. Des societes animates. Paris, 1878. Introduction, and 
Conclusion, p. 527, sqq. 

Gumplowicz. Bxissenkampf, § 30, et pass. 

Lazarus. Z.f. v. P. I. 32. “ Was ist ein Volk?” 

Pioger. R. 1. S. February, 1894. “Theorie organique de la vie sociale.” 
Worms, AV. Pi,. I. S. 1 . “ La sociologie.” 


II. The Place of Sociology among the Social Sciences 

Comte, A. Philosophic positive. 1 . “ Introductory Principles.” 
Fiamingo. A./. .S'. June, 1894. “ Une loi sociologique.” 

Giddings, F. H. “Province of Sociology.” A. A. P. S. 1891. 

“Sociological Character of Political Economy.” American Economic 
Association^ II. 129. 

“ Sociology as a University Study.” Polit. Sci. Quar. A^ol. VI. 635. 
de Greef. Introduction d la sociologie, Vol. 1 . chaj). vii. 

Les lois sociologiques. 

Gumplowicz, L. Soziologie und Politik. 1892. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 267 

Leslie, T. E. C. Essays in Political and Moral Philosophy. Dublin, 1879. 

XXVI. “ Political Economy and Sociology.” 

Limanowski. R. I. S. July, 1894. “La classification des sciences et la 
sociologie.” 

Patten, S. N. “The Relations of Sociology to Economics.” Amer. Ecoti. 
Assoc. Vol. X. 

de Roberty, E. La sociologie. Paris, 18S6. 

Small, A. W. “The Relation of Sociology to Economics.” Amer. Econ. 
Assoc. Vol. X. 

Spencer, H. Principles of Sociology, Vol. I. Part ii. 

Sumner, W. G. Princeton Review, LVII. p. 303. “Sociology.” 

Ward. Pol. Science Quar. Vol. X. “Static and Dynamic Sociology.” 

A. J. S. Vol. I. “The Place of Sociology among the Sciences.” 
Worms, R. R. I. S. I. 437. “ Essai de classification des sciences socialcs.” 
Pi,. I. S. June, 1894. “ La sociologie et reconomie politique.” 

III. The Scientific Character op Sociology 

Bernes, M. Rev. d'Econ. Pol. 189^. “ Les deux directions de la socio¬ 

logie contemporaine.” 

Cohn, G. System der NationaWconomie. Bd. I. Stuttgart, 1880. 
“ Einleitung.” 

Durkheim, E. Les regies de la methode sociologique. Paris, 1895. 
Espinas, A. Des soeietes animales. Paris, 187^5. Introduction. 
Huntington, F. D. Hiiman Society. Neu' York, i860. Chapter i. 
de Laveleye, E. Les lois natnrelles et Vobjet de Veconomie politique. 
Kingsley, C. The Limits of Exact Science as applied to History. 
Cambridge, 1860. 

Leslie, T. E C. Essays. Dublin, 1879. III. “ The Individual and the 
Crowd.” 

Lewis, G. C. On the Methods of Observation and Reasoning in Politics. 
London, 1852. 

Mayr, G. Die Gesetzmdssigkeit und Gesellschaftsleben. 

Menger, C. Untersuchungen iiber die Methoden der Socialwissensehaften. 
Leipzig, 1883. 

Novicow, J. Les luttes entre soeietes hunuiines. Paris, 1893. 

Spencer, H. The Study of Sociology. New York, 1880. 

Strada, J. La loi de V histoire. Paris, 1894. 


CHAPTER 1. 

The Organic Character op Society 

Bluntschli, J. C. Theory of the State. Oxford, 1885. 

Kleine Schriften, Vol. I. clui]). x. Nordlingen, 1879. 
Bordier, A. La vie des soeietes. Paris, 1887. Chapter ii. 
Espinas. Des soeietes animales. Esjiecially the conclusion 


268 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


Fonillee. Science sociale contempOraine. Book II. ••• 

de Greek Introduction d la sociologie, Vol. I. chapters i. and vi. 
Gumplowicz. Dev Rassenlcamjif. IV. 

Grundriss der Sociologie. III. 

Helhvald. CulturgescMchte. I. “ Die socialen Gesetze. ” 

Hoffding. Etliik, pp. 187, sqg. 

V. Humboldt, AV. Gcs. JVerke, I. p. 301 sqq. ' 

Jones. “The Social Organism,” in Seth-Haldane: Essays in Philoso¬ 
phical Criticism, pp. 187-215. 

Lilicnfeld. Gedanken iiher die Socialicissenschaft der Zuknn ft. 

JNIenger, C. Die Methode der Soeialnrissenschaften. Book III. 

^Mackenzie. Introduction to Social Philosophy. Chapter iii. 

Patten, S. N. “The Failure of Biologic Sociology.” A. A. P. S. Vol. IV. 
Pioger. Px,. I. S. February, 1894. “Theorie organiqiie de la vie sociale.” 
Schaeffle. Bau und Leben des socialen Korpers. 

Sj)encer. Principles of Sociology. Part II. 

Illustrations of Universal Progress. Chapter x. 

Wallace, W. Mind. VIII. “ Ethics and Sociology.” 

CHAPTER 11. 

Race and Locality 

Bordier, A. La vie des socUtes. Paris, 1887. Chapters xi.-xvii. 

Buckle. History of Civilization in England. New York, 1858-62. 
Chapter ii. 

Cohn. System der Nationalbkonomie. Band I. Stuttgart, 1885. 

Abschn. I. (especially chapters vii.-ix.) 

Dumont. Depopulation et civilisation, Paris, 1890. 

de Greef, G. Introduction d la sociologie.l. Clmptcr iii. Paris, 1886. 

Gumplowicz. liassenkampf, §§ 25, 30, 31, et pass. 

Helhvald. Culturgcschichte. Band I. p. 36. 

Hbflding. Ethik, p. 273, sqq. 

Honegger. Allgemeine CulturgescMchte. Leipzig, 1882. I. p. 153,677. 
IMarshall. Principles of Economics. I. Book IV. 

Aleyer, E. Geschichte des Altertums. II. §40. Stuttgart, 1893. ' 

Montesquieu. IJesprit des lois. Chapters xiv.-xix. 

Novicow. Les luttes entre societes humaines. Liv. II. ch. ii. ; Liv. IV. 
ch. vii. 

Patten, S. N. Pol. Science Qaar. Vol. X. “The Law of Population re¬ 
stated.” 

Pearson, C. National Life and Character. Chapters i. iii. London. 
Wagner, A. Lehr- und Handbuch der politischen Oekonomie. Erste 
Hauptabtheilung. Drilte Auflage. Erste Theil. Buch IV. 
Leipzig, 1893. 

Waitz. Anthropologic der Naturvolker. I. p, 38, sqq. , ■ 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 


269 


CHAPTER III. 

Association 

Bordier, A. La vie des societes. Chapter ii.-iii. 

Espinas, Les societes animaies. Chapter iv. 

Foiiillee, A. La science sociale. Book II. 

Giddings, F. H. The Principles of Sociology. Book II. chap. i.; Book III. 
Gide, Ch. R. I. S., I., 385. “L’idee de solidarity ” 

Gumplowicz. Rassenkampf, H 35 - 3 ^* 

Guyau, M. Part au point de vue sociologique. Paris, 1889. 
de Lestrade, C. Elements de sociologie. Book I. Paris, 1889. 

Novicow, J. Les luttes entre societes humaines. Liv. 11 . chap. vi. 
Pioger. R. I. S., February, 1894. “Theorie organique de la vie sociale.” 
Spencer, H. Princijjles of Sociology. 

Zeitschrift fiir Volkerpsychologie, Vol. 1 . pp. 32, sqg. ; III. i, sqq. 


CHAPTER lY. 

The Social Mind 

Bosanquet, B. I. J. E. April, 1894. “ The Reality of the General 

Will.” 

Bradley, F. H. Ethical Studies. London, 1876. 

Clifford, W. II. Essays and Addresses. London, 1879. 

Dewey, J. Outlines of Ethics. Part L chapter i. Ann Arbor, Mich. 1891. 
Fouillee, A. La science sociale. Liv. III. “ The Social Consciousness.” 
Giddings, F. H. The Principles of Sociology. Book 11 . chapter ii. 
Guyau, M. Part au point de vue sociologique. Paris, 1889. 

Ihering, R. Per Zireck im Recht. Leipzig, 1877. 

Lazarus. Z. f. v. P. II. “ Das Verhaltniss des Einzeln zur Gesanimtheit.” 
Lewes. Problems of Life and Mind. Vol. III. The Study of Psychology. 
Nettleship. A. January, 1892. “ Social Authority. ” 

Riehl, A. Der philosophische Kriticismus, II. 2 ; Eng. Tr. Science and 
Metaphysics. London, 1894. 

Seth-Haldane. Essays in Philosophical Criticism, p. 193, et pass. London, 
1883. 

Stephen, L. The Science of Ethics. 

Tarde, G. Les lois de Vimitaiion. 

La logique sociale. 


270 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


CHAPTER V. 

Causes of Social Activity 

See in general the economic discussions of man’s needs as a stimulus to 
industry, e.g .: 

Cohn. System der NationaloJconomie. 1 . S, 256-290. 

IMarshall. Frinciples of Economics. I. 47, 78 sg., 150 sg. 

Also 

Dumont. Depopulation et civilisation. Chapter vi. Paris, 1890. 
Morley, J. Critical Miscellanies. London, 1871. “Some Greek Con¬ 
ceptions of Social Growth,” with reference to Plato, Polit. 370- 
373. Aristot. Pol. I. ii. 

Patten, S. The Theory of Dynamic Economics. Publications of the 
University of Penusylvania. Philadelphia, 1892. 

“The Theory of Social Forces.” Supplement, A. A. P. S. 1896. 
Stephen, L. The Science of Ethics. London, 1892. 

Ward, L. F. Dynamic Sociology. 1 . chap. vii. 


CHAPTER YI. 

Modes op Social Activity 

iMuch material is found in books on Economics, especially Wagner, 
Lehr- und Handbuch der politischen Oekonomie; also in books on Ethics, 
as in Hotiding, ELhik, S. 320-350. 

Loria, A. Les bases economigv.es de la constitution sociale. Paris, 1893. 
Mackenzie, J. S. I. J. E. 1893. “The Ptelation between Ethics and 
Economics.” 

^Molinari. La morale iconomigue. Paris, 1888. Liv. 1 . 

Yovicow, J. Les luttes entre socUtes humaines. Liv. III. 

Stephen, J. F. Liberty, Eguality, and Erdternity. New York, 1873. 

Smart, W. 1 . J. E. 1893. “The Place of Industry in the Social 
Organism.” 

Yilley, E. R. I. S. II. “Du role de I’Etat dans I’ordre economique.” 
Z. f. V. P. Bd. III. S. 21-30. Lazarus, Synthelische Gedanken. 


CHAPTER YII. 

Industrial Organisation of Society. 

EXCHANGE. 

The LToMdbooks on Political Economy. 

Decugis, H. R. I. S. 1894. “ De 1 ’ influence du progres des communi¬ 

cations sur r evolution des societes.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY, 


271 


PROPERTY. 

Lafargue. The Evolution of Property. London, 1890. 

de Laveleye, E. L. V. Be la proprieU et ses formes 2)rimitives. Paris, 
1874. 

Letournean. Property: Its Origin and Development. London and New 
York, 1892. 

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT IN ENGLAND. 

Ashley. English Economic History. New York and London, 1892, 1895. 
Rogers, J. E. T. Six Centuries of Work and Wages. London, 1884. 
Toynbee, A. The Industrial Revolution. London, 1884. 


CHAPTER VIII. 

The Family 

Achelis. Die EntwicTcelung der Ehe. Berlin, 1893. 

Delbriick. Die Indogermanische Verwandtschajtsnamen. Ahhd. sdchs. 

Ges. d. Wiss. Phil. hist. Classe, XL 1890. 

Bachofen, J. J. Das Mutterrecht. Stuttgart, 1861. 

Bancroft. H. H. The Native Races of the Pacific States of North Aonerica. 
New York, 1874. 

Girard-Teulon. Les origines de la famille. Paris, 1874, 

Janet, P. La famille. Paris, 1866. Sixth Edition, 
de Lestrade, C. Elements de sociologie. Paris, 1889. Livr. II. 
Letoiirneau, Ch. The Evolution of Marriage. New York. 

Lipi)ert, J. Die Geschichte der Familie. Stuttgart, 1886. 

ISIorgan. Systems of Consanguinity and, Affinity of the Human Family. 
Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, XVII. 1870. 

Ancient Society. New York and London. 1877. 

]McLennan, J. F. Studies in Ancient History. London, 1876. 

The Patriarchal Theory. London, 1885. 

Post, A. H. Die Geschlechtsgenossenschaft der Urzeit und die Entstehung 
der Ehe. Oldenburg, 1875. 

Studien zur Rntwickelungsgescltichte des Familienrechts. Oldenburg 
and Leipzig, 1890. 

Smith, W. R. Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia. Cambridge, 1885. 
Starcke, C. N. The Primitive Family in its Origin and Development. 
New York and London, 1889. 

Waitz, T. Anthropjologie der Naturvolker. Leipzig, 1859-1872. 
Westermarck, E. The History of Human Marriage. London and New 
York, 1891. 


272 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY.. 


CHAPTER IX. 

The State. 

Ahrens, H. Conrs de droit naturel. 7 ieme ed. Leipzig, 1875. 

Bagehot, W. Physics and Politics. New York, 1884. 

Austin, J, Lectures on Jurisprudence. 4 tli ed. London, 1873. 

Province of Jurisprudence determined. 

Bentham, J. Works. Vol. I. Edinburgh, 1843. 

Bluntschli, J. C. Allgemeines Staalsrecht. 6 Auf. Stuttgart, 1885. 

E. Tr. The Theory of the state. Oxford, 1885. 

Kleine Schriften. Band I. Nordlingen, 1879. 

Burgess, J. W. Political Science and Constitutional Law. Boston, 1890. 
Gumplowicz, L. Die sociologische Slaatsidee. Graz, 1892. 

Hegel, G. W. F. Philosophie des Rechts ; Werke. Band VIII. Berlin, 
1840. 

Hobbes, T. Leviathan. London, 1651. 

Holland, T. E. The Elements of Jurisprudence. Third Edition. Oxford, 
1886. 

Ihering, R. Der Zweck im Recht. Leipzig, 1877. 

Kant, I. Die Metaphysik der Sitten, I. Rechtslehre. 1797. 

Janet, P. Histoire de la philosophie morale et politique. Paris, i860. 
Leroy Beaulieu, P. The Modern State. London, 1891. 

Lieber. Political Ethics. Philadelphia and London, 1875. 

Lorimer, The Institutes of Law. Second Edition, 1880. 

Maine, H. S. Ancient Law. New York, 1864. 

Early History of Institutions, chap. xii. xiii. London, 1875. 
Popular Government. New York, 1886. 

V. Mohl, R, Die Geschichte und Literatur der Staatswissenschaften. 
Erlangen, 1855. 

Volkerrecht und Politik. Tiibingen, 1860-69. 

Pollock, F. The History of the Science of Politics. London, 1890. 
Sidney, A. Discourses Concerning Government. London, 1751. 

Wagner. Lehr- und Handbuch der politischen Oekonomie. I. i. Band VI. 
Wilson, W. The State. Boston, 1892. 

Woolsey, T. D. Poluical Science. New York, 1878.' 

FUNCTIONS OF THE STATE. 

Duguit, L. R. I. S. 1894. “Des fonctions de P Etat moderne.” 
Dupont-White, M. L' iiulividu et V Etat. Third Edition. Paris, 1865. 
Holtzendorff, F. Frincipien der Politik. Berlin, 1879. 

V. Humboldt, W. Werke. Band VII. “ Ideen zu einem Versuch die 
Grenzen des Staats zu bestimineu.” Breslau, 1851. Berlin, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY, 


273 


Laboulaye, E. V Elat et ses limites. Paris, 1871. 

Novicow, J. Les lattes entre societes humaines. Livr. VI. Chap, vi. 
Paulsen, F. Systeyn der Ethik. Bucli IV. Berlin, 1889. 

Ritchie, D. G. Principles of State Interference. London, 1891. 
Simon, J. La libcrU. 2 ienie ed. Paris, 1859. 

Stephen, J. F. Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. New York, 1873. 


CHAPTER X. 

The Individual. 

Andrews, E. B. Yale Review, 1893. “Individualism as a sociological 
Principle.” 

Crozier. Civilization and Progress. 

Donisthorpe, W. Individualism: A System of Politics. London, 1894. 
Harris, W. T, Jour. Social Sci. X. 1879. “Method of Study in 
Social Science.” 

Montgomery, E. i/zw;?, XIX.-XX. “The Unity of the Individual.” 
Seth-Haldane. Essays in Philosophical Criticism, pp. 34, 35, 192, 208, 
et pass. 

Simmel. Uber sociale Differenzirung. 

Spencer, H. The Man and the State. 

Z. f. V. P. Band 1 . 424, sqg. 11 . 

Mackenzie, J. S. Introduction to Social Philosophy, chap. vi. 


CHAPTERS XI.-XII. 

Processes in Social Development. 

Donisthorpe. Individualism. Chap. i. 

Dumont. Depopulation et Civilisation. Chap. ix. 

Gumplowicz, L. Rassenkampf. §§ 6-8, 24-28, 34, etc. 

Hellwald. Culturgeschichte. Band 1 . s. 29 sqq. 

Kuenen, A. The Religion of Israel. E. Tr. 1 . no. 

]\leillet, A. R. I. S. 1 . “Les lois du langage.” 
lileyer, E. Geschichte des Allertums. Band 11 , §§ 26, 34a, 

Novicow, J. Les luttes entre societes humaines. Livr. IV. chap, v. et pass. 
Spencer, H. Progress: Its Law and Cause. 

Simmel. Uber sociale Differenzierung. 

Whitney, W. C. Princeton Review, 1881 , p. 443 . 

The Life and Growth of Language. New York, 1889. 

Stiong, Logeman, and Wheeler. The History of Language. London, 
1891. 


274 


INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY. 


CHAPTERS Xlir.-XIV. 

Natural Selection. 

Alexander, S. I. J. E. 1892. “Natural Selection in Morals.” 

Ammon, 0 . Die naturlidie Auslese heivi Menschen. Jena, 1893. 

Die GesellschafUordnung und Hire natiirliclien Grundlagen. Jena, 
1895. 

Bonar. “The Struggle for Existence,” in Seth-Haidane : Essays in 
Philosophical Criticism. 

Clifford, W. K. Lectures and Essays, Vol. I. p. 106, ff. London. 

Ferri, E. Socialismus und moderne Wissenschaft. (Deutsche Uebers.) 
Leipzig, 1895. 

Giddings, F. H. 1 . J. E. 1893. “The Ethics of Social Progress.” 

The Principles of Sociology. Book IV. 

Gumplowicz, L. Der Rassenkampf. 

Hadley, A. T. Yale Review, Vol. 1 . “ Ethics as a Political Science.” 

Ihering, R. Der Zweek im Rccht. Leipzig, 1877. 

Kovalevsky. R. I. S. 1894. “Les originesdu devoir.” 

Kidd, B. Social Evolution. London and New York, 1894. 

Lapouge. R.I.S. 1894. “ Le darwinisme dans la science sociale.” 

“ La vie et la mort des nations.” 

Le Bon, G. Les lois psychologiques de V Solution des peuples. Paris, 1894. 
IMorley, J. On Compromise. Especially Appendix, “Doctrine of Liberty.” 
Ritchie, D. G. Darwinism and Politics. London, 1891. 

Sorley. Ethics of Naturalism. London, 1885. 

Stephen, Leslie. The Science of Ethics. London, 1882. 


PLYMOUTH 

WILLIAM BRENDON ANP SON 
printers 







I 


\ 


r 








•>-* 

r 


t 

<» 


i 


\ 








I 


f' 


* 


p 


$ 


ih 


I 



41 

A 


A 


?■ 


t 


* 


t 


* 


f . 


r 



I 


•i- 


♦ 


> 

< 



A 






» 

Ji. J «' 










, /i * .'f 


“V •'■‘■V 


.>Vf.r7^ 










LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 























































































































































































































































































































































































































